misakanet_get_lesson

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

Without annotations, the description fully discloses side effects (none), auth (none), rate limits (local stdio, one per call), output truncation (5000 chars), and a warning about not sending private data. All behavioral traits are covered.

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 efficient with no fluff, but could be slightly more structured (e.g., separating output format). However, it is front-loaded with the main purpose and all critical info is present.

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 no output schema and simple input, the description covers return format, truncation, error cases, side effects, auth, and rate limits. It is fully self-contained and prepared for agent invocation.

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% (both parameters described), but the description adds value by clarifying 'provide either path or id' and specifying that output includes path and markdown content truncated to 5000 characters. This goes beyond the schema definitions.

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 'Fetch one public MisakaNet lesson' with specific resources (repository path or lesson ID) and distinguishes from siblings by advising use after search or when explicitly referenced, not for broad discovery.

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?

Explicitly specifies when to use (after misakanet_search or explicit reference) and when not to use (not for broad discovery). Also provides input semantics, error cases, and side effects.

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