get_briefing

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden. It describes the output in detail (project goal, task, dependencies, decisions, context, feedback) and implies a read-only operation. However, it does not explicitly state safety or side effects, which would push it to 5.

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 three sentences: a headline definition, a comma-separated list of contents, and a usage timing instruction. Every sentence is essential, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 low complexity (one param with implicit meaning) and the existence of an output schema, the description provides all necessary context for correct invocation. It tells what the tool returns and when to use it.

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 coverage is 0% for the single parameter task_id. The description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond what is obvious from context. However, the tool's purpose and usage guidance partially compensate, making the parameter clear enough for invocation.

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's purpose: 'Get an onboarding packet for a task: everything needed to start cold.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the list of bundled items distinguishes it from siblings like get_retrospective.

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?

Explicit usage guidance is provided: 'Call this right after claim_task, and again after a review requests changes.' This tells the agent precisely when to invoke the tool and implies when not to.

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