build_prep_pack

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

Without annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: the tool no longer performs any operation and only returns a retirement guide. It also mentions PDF export is handled externally.

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 well-structured with a prominent deprecation warning, but includes detailed workflow explanation that could be shortened. Still, it is relatively concise and informative.

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?

Essential deprecation and alternatives are covered, but parameter semantics are missing, and output (retirement guide) is not described. For a deprecated tool this may be sufficient, but gaps remain.

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 has 3 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain their purpose or usage. Since the tool is deprecated, parameters may be irrelevant, but no semantics are provided.

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 is deprecated and only returns a retirement guide, which is a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from siblings by directing to new workflow (compose_paper, create_paper, bind_paper_slot).

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?

Explicitly states the tool should not be used for its original purpose, provides detailed alternative workflow using compose_paper, create_paper, bind_paper_slot, and references get_role_manual for guidance.

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