Astria-Index

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns 'formatted text' and details the guide contents (workflows, conventions, best practices). However, it doesn't explicitly state idempotency or safety characteristics, though these are implied by the 'Get' verb and zero-parameter schema.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections: purpose declaration, content details, usage conditions, and return value specification. No redundant text; every sentence provides distinct value regarding functionality or usage context.

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 zero-parameter documentation tool, the description is complete. It covers purpose, usage triggers, and output format. The presence of output schema information in the description ('Returns:...') satisfies completeness requirements without needing external schema documentation.

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?

Input schema contains zero parameters, establishing baseline 4. Description correctly implies no configuration is needed to retrieve the complete guide, consistent with the empty schema.

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?

Description opens with specific verb 'Get' and clear resource 'Astria operating guide'. It inherently distinguishes from operational siblings (remember/recall/etc.) by describing a documentation retrieval function that 'covers all available tools' rather than manipulating memory data.

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?

Contains explicit 'Use this when:' section with three specific scenarios: connecting for the first time, needing a refresher, and onboarding new AI platforms. This provides clear guidance on when to invoke this meta-tool versus operational memory tools.

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