stellaris_learning_path

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

No annotations at all, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose one behavioral trait beyond the name — the list is ordered — but says nothing about read-only safety, result length, or whether paths are curated vs generated.

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler, with what-it-is front-loaded before the usage trigger. Nothing to trim.

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 single optional enum parameter with no output schema, the definition covers what the tool returns and when to reach for it. Only the read-only/safety framing is unstated, which is minor for a retrieval tool.

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 100% and the enum values are already documented on the `path` property, so the description adds essentially nothing about the parameter. Baseline 3 applies; 'for a topic' only loosely maps `path` to a topic selector.

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?

States a concrete resource and shape: an ordered reading list for a topic. That distinguishes it from stellaris_search (raw results) and stellaris_explain (single-concept explanation), though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

Gives real trigger conditions with quoted user phrasings ('where do I start / how do I learn X') and the beginner-teaching scenario. It stops short of stating when NOT to use it or pointing to an alternative sibling.

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