vectis_inspect

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and non-destructive, so the description adds meaningful context by clarifying that no paid data call is executed. This cost/execution guarantee is valuable behavioral information beyond what the annotations convey.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence communicates the tool's purpose and its key non-execution guarantee with zero wasted words. Every part of the description earns its place.

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?

For a simple one-parameter, read-only inspection tool, the description is complete: it states what is inspected, that it is scoped to one operation, and that no paid execution occurs. The schema enum fills in the supported operation names, so no critical guidance is missing.

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 0%, so the description must help interpret the 'operation' parameter. It does this by indicating the inspection is scoped to one supported operation, and the enum supplies the exact supported values. It doesn't detail each operation's output, but this is sufficient for a simple parameter.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Inspect'), names the resource ('current Monid schema and pricing'), and scopes it to a single supported operation. It also differentiates the tool from sibling data-call tools by explicitly stating it does not execute a paid data call.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: to inspect schema and pricing before committing to an operation. It also establishes an important exclusion by stating it does not execute a paid data call, which distinguishes it from the operation-executing siblings, though it does not name them explicitly.

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