outremer_fetch_source_excerpt

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool fetches an excerpt (read operation) and that it's from a curated source, but it doesn't mention any limitations, such as whether the excerpt is truncated, how it handles missing sources, or any rate limits. The description is adequate but not rich in behavioral detail.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes a key usage hint. No wasted words; it 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description is fairly complete. It explains the source_key format and the excerpt nature. It could mention what happens if the source is not found or if max_chars is exceeded, but for a simple fetch tool, this is adequate.

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 100%, so both parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds a bit of context by explaining that source_key can be a number, title keyword, or URL fragment, which goes beyond the schema's generic description. However, it doesn't add much for max_chars beyond what the schema already provides (default, min, max). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 fetches a short text excerpt from a curated source URL, with a specific verb ('fetch') and resource ('source excerpt'). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on excerpts from curated sources, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with other tools like get_sources or get_dataset.

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 clear usage context: it tells the agent to use source_key as a number, title keyword, or URL fragment from get_sources. This implies when to use it (after getting sources) and how to reference sources, but it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives.

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