get_best_practices

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, what the return value looks like, or any side effects or limitations. The description merely restates the tool's basic function without offering behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is concise and front-loaded with the key action and resource, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is simple with only one parameter and no output schema, so the description does not need extensive detail. However, it does not describe what a 'best practice' response looks like or how the feature maps to returned content, leaving some ambiguity. Given the minimal complexity, this is a minor gap rather than a critical one.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema fully describes the single parameter 'feature' with examples, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as acceptable values or relationship to the tool's purpose. Baseline 3 is appropriate given complete schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves best practices and tips for a specific feature, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_knowledge and search_knowledge by focusing on best practices, though it could be more explicit about what constitutes a 'feature'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_knowledge or get_knowledge. No context, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage solely from the name.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.