toolfunnel_tool_instructions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It describes a retrieval operation ('Get the full usage instructions') and implies no side effects. However, it does not explicitly declare read-only or idempotent behavior, which is a minor 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, well-structured sentence that immediately states the purpose, includes relevant examples, and provides a usage note. Every word adds value with no redundancy.

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 low complexity (one parameter, no output schema), the description adequately covers what the tool does, what it returns, and when to use it. It could optionally specify the output format (e.g., text), but this is not a critical omission.

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 single parameter 'name' has a schema description that specifies it must be an exact tool name from toolfunnel_list_tools. The tool description adds context by listing examples ('venv, the reliable invoke command, safety notes'), reinforcing the meaning 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 it retrieves full usage instructions/documentation for a specific tool by name, giving examples like 'venv, the reliable invoke command, safety notes'. It effectively distinguishes from siblings that list, run, or provide how-to guidance.

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 explicitly advises 'Read this before running the tool yourself,' providing clear context for when to use it. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the sibling set makes the usage context clear.

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