Bloom get thresholds

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so 'Read-only' is redundant. 'Returns JSON thresholds' adds only a minor output hint, and since an output schema exists, it is largely covered elsewhere. The description adds scoping context but no deeper behavioral traits like whether thresholds are static or computed.

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 with no wasted wording, and the core purpose is front-loaded before the sibling routing advice.

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 single-parameter lookup, the description gives enough context to select and invoke the tool. Annotations and the output schema cover safety and return structure, though the description could say more about what thresholds represent or when they change.

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% and the sole parameter is already documented with example categories. The description mentions 'task category' but adds no syntax, format, or semantic detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 specific verb and resource ('Read quality thresholds and handoff triggers') and scopes it to a task category. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling bloom_check_handoff, which applies those thresholds to history.

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 clear routing guidance by naming bloom_check_handoff as the tool for applying thresholds to history. It does not state explicit exclusions or when-not-to-use cases, but the alternative is clearly identified.

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