stellaris_explain

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the behavior model: it performs a KB search and returns a digest of the best-matching pages plus glossary and related-page hits, so the agent knows this is a read-only retrieval that aggregates multiple sources. It does not mention limits such as truncated digests, caching, or what happens on a miss, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose ('ONE-CALL answer') and the return shape, followed by the routing rule. No filler, and the ordering prioritizes what the agent needs first.

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 read-only, three-parameter retrieval tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose, aggregation behavior, and call priority. Minor gaps remain — no statement of empty-result behavior or digest size constraints — but nothing essential to invoking it correctly 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 100%, so the schema already documents term, pages, and maxChars in detail. The description only implies page and text-size behavior through 'digest of the best-matching wiki page(s)' and adds no syntax or format guidance beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ('answer to "what does X mean?"') and precisely describes the composite behavior: searching the KB and returning a digest of best-matching wiki pages plus glossary and related-page hits. It also distinguishes itself from the individual sibling tools (stellaris_search, stellaris_get_page, stellaris_glossary, stellaris_related) by presenting itself as the aggregated one-call answer.

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?

It gives an explicit routing instruction — 'Use this first for any Stellaris term, UI label, resource, job, ship part, crisis or mechanic' — which covers when to use it and implies the individual lookup tools are fallbacks. It stops short of naming those alternatives or stating when not to use it, so the agent must infer the deeper-dive path.

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