better-bear

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent behavior. The description adds valuable context beyond this by specifying that it loads 'full content' (not metadata) and emphasizes selective loading ('only relevant files'), which helps the agent understand performance implications and proper sequencing.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by usage guidance and constraints. Every sentence earns its place by adding critical information without waste, making it highly efficient and well-structured.

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 (one parameter, no output schema) and rich annotations, the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose, usage, and constraints effectively. A minor gap is the lack of detail on error handling or return format, but this is acceptable for a read-only tool with clear annotations.

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 fully documents the 'paths' parameter. The description adds minimal value by providing example paths ('bear/arch-overview.md') and clarifying they are 'relative paths,' but this is redundant with the schema's description. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles most documentation.

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 specific action ('Load the full content') and target resource ('specific files from the context library'), distinguishing it from siblings like bear_context_search (searching) or bear_context_add (adding). It explicitly mentions 'never load everything,' which differentiates it from bulk operations.

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 explicit guidance on when to use ('Use after reading the index to load only relevant files') and when not to use ('never load everything'). It references an alternative (the index) and sets clear boundaries for appropriate usage.

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