perseus_include

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

Explicitly states 'Read-only', which aligns with the readOnlyHint annotation. Adds additional context about directive inheritance from parent configuration, providing useful behavioral insight beyond the annotation.

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?

Two concise sentences that front-load the primary action and key differentiator. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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 output schema being present (but not shown), the description sufficiently covers purpose, usage, parameters, and behavioral traits. It is complete for an AI agent to understand when and how to use this tool.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, but tool description adds meaningful context: examples for 'last' and 'since' (e.g., '14d/2w/24h') and clarifies the purpose of bounding a growing file. This enriches the schema information.

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 action ('Include and render') and the resource ('another Perseus source file'), with additional specifics about recursive resolution. It distinguishes from sibling tools like perseus_read and perseus_list by focusing on inclusion and composition.

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?

Provides explicit use cases: 'compose context from multiple files' and 'share common sections'. Also gives concrete examples for bounding a file with 'last=N' or 'since=...'. Missing explicit 'when not to use' but still offers clear guidance.

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