Query Context Budget

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions extraction and synthesis but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, whether it modifies state, how it selects content, or what the return format looks like. This is a significant gap.

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 sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the core action. However, it is a dense run-on with many components in parentheses, which slightly reduces readability. Still, it avoids unnecessary words.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description should explain more about what the tool returns and how the token budget is enforced. It doesn't mention the response format, whether the summary is a list or prose, or how 'optimal' is determined. This leaves the agent guessing about expected behavior.

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 coverage is 100% for both parameters (query and budgetTokens), and their descriptions are clear. The description adds context about what types of content are included (Lore, Characters, etc.), but it does not add extra meaning to individual parameters beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the tool extracts and synthesizes an optimal context budget from specific story components (Lore, Character Profiles, Timeline, Foreshadowing, Plot Holes) within a token limit. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by being the only context query/synthesis tool, though the term 'Context Budget' is not fully explained.

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 implies usage: the tool should be used when you need a token-budgeted context summary for a query. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it over sibling tools like story_get_project_info or story_analyze_pacing, nor does it provide exclusions.

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