mcquest_phase_context

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, and it does so well. It explicitly states READ ONLY, explains what happens when phase and query are supplied, describes grouping behavior, return context, and claims to preserve original evidence while working for both past and future phases.

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 compact and front-loaded with 'READ ONLY' and 'Locate relevant phase/stage documentation' before moving into usage details. Every sentence adds value, and the examples are specific without being verbose.

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?

The description is reasonably complete because the output schema already covers the return shape, and the description clarifies the main usage mode, grouping, and scope. It is missing guidance on during what circumstances a caller should prefer another sibling tool, but the core behavior and key parameter semantics are present.

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?

The description adds meaningful semantics for the two central parameters, 'query' and 'phase', including examples like 'responsive overflow', 'Android', '61', and '61-Part-II-A'. However, it does not explain the remaining parameters such as max_results, context_lines, include_audits, or include_implementation, despite the schema having 0% description coverage.

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 that this tool locates phase/stage documentation and frames it as read-only, which gives an agent a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly name sibling tools or draw a boundary against them, but the 'phase/stage documentation' scope is distinct enough among the sibling list.

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 gives practical usage guidance for the query and phase modes, including concrete examples and the grouping behavior when phase is used. However, it does not state when to choose this tool over siblings such as mcquest_search_docs, mcquest_project_context, or mcquest_compare_phase, so the tool-selection guidance is only implied.

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