get_truth

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only says 'Get', implying a read operation. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, side effects, or response format. Since there are no annotations to contradict, there is no contradiction.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a single sentence and one line for the parameter. It is front-loaded and contains no redundant or extraneous information.

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?

Despite having only one parameter and an output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what a 'truth patch document' is or what the tool returns, leaving the agent without enough context to use it effectively. Sibling tools like get_eureka or get_protocol likely have similar descriptions, but this one lacks differentiation.

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 input schema has one required string parameter 'name' with 0% description coverage. The description adds semantic value by labeling it as 'Truth patch name' and providing an example. However, it does not explain the format or constraints of the name beyond the example.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'specific truth patch document'. It provides an example parameter value, but does not distinguish it from sibling tools like get_eureka or get_protocol, which also retrieve specific documents.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention conditions, exclusions, or prerequisites for using get_truth over other 'get' tools.

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