Metis — Get Agent Context

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

No annotations are provided, but the description discloses reading two files and the fallback of listing agents if not found. It does not overtly state it is read-only, but the behavior is clear enough for an agent to infer safety.

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 three sentences plus an Args list, all directly informative. No wasted words, and the key action is front-loaded.

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?

With one parameter and an output schema (not shown but present), the description adequately covers the tool's action and error case. It does not repeat schema details, leaving return format to the output schema.

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 'agent_slug' has no description in the schema (0% coverage), but the description adds meaning by defining it as the folder name and providing examples. This compensates for the schema gap.

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 states a specific verb ('Load') and resource ('agent's system prompt and contract'), and distinguishes from sibling 'get_*' tools by specifying it reads two specific files from an agent folder. It also notes a fallback behavior if the agent is not found.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose (loading an agent's system prompt and contract) and includes an error-handling behavior. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives like 'get_context' or specify when not to use it.

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