extract_section

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It states only the extraction operation and does not explain selector-miss behavior, source requirements, authentication needs, or any other behavioral trait beyond the obvious read operation.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Its brevity is appropriate in form, though it is arguably too short for a tool with seven parameters and no annotations.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (seven parameters, no annotations, overlapping sibling tools), the description is missing critical context about when and how to use it. The output schema covers return values, but usage guidance and parameter context remain largely absent.

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?

Schema description coverage is 57%, and the description mentions only 'selector' without adding meaning beyond the schema's own selector description ('exact section title, regex, or 1-based ordinal'). The other six parameters, including required 'source', receive no explanation in the description, so it does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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 states a specific verb (Extract), resource (one section's body text), and method (by selector), so the core operation is clear. However, it gives no domain context (e.g., filings/reports) and does not distinguish this tool from siblings like get_section or ai_extract, which likely overlap.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_section, get_filing, or ai_extract. No required context, exclusions, or comparison to sibling tools is provided.

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