Read exercise

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already makes clear this is a non-mutating read operation. The description adds useful detail by naming the returned content, but it does not disclose edge-case behavior such as what happens when no exercise is open, nor does it describe freshness or scoping behavior beyond the schema defaults.

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 a single well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and scope, then lists the returned information. Every clause contributes without repetition.

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?

With no output schema, the description does important work by enumerating the main return contents. Combined with complete parameter descriptions in the schema and a readOnly annotation, it is nearly complete, though it could specify behavior when no exercise is currently open.

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 both parameters are documented in the schema, including the default behavior for 'ref'. The description does not add meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: reading the exercise currently open in beook, and enumerates what is returned (instructions, inline answer fields and current values, answer pool). The phrase 'currently open' helps distinguish it from opening or listing exercises, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools.

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 'currently open' phrasing implies when this tool is appropriate, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use it instead of beook_open_exercise or beook_list_exercises, nor any stated prerequisites or exclusions.

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