get_license_obligations

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It clearly describes return categories (obligations, permissions, etc.) implying read-only behavior, but does not explicitly state no side effects or required permissions. Adequate but not exhaustive.

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?

Well-structured with separate sections for purpose, args, returns, and example. Slightly wordy with bullets, but every sentence adds value. Front-loaded with purpose.

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 tool's scope (getting license obligations), the description is complete: covers input parameters, return categories with examples, and fits within the sibling context. No missing elements apparent.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: licenses as list of SPDX IDs with example, and output_format with possible values (json, text, checklist, markdown). Adds significant 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?

Clearly states verb 'Get' and resource 'obligations for specified licenses', with a specific question 'What must I do to comply?'. Differentiates from sibling tools like get_license_details by focusing on compliance obligations.

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?

While the description implicitly guides by stating the critical question it answers, it lacks explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives. No exclusions or comparisons with sibling tools are provided.

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