help

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral aspects. It states the tool 'retrieves documentation,' which implies a read-only operation, but it does not disclose the format of the output (e.g., text, pager) or any potential side effects. The description is adequate but minimal.

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 two sentences long, front-loads the purpose, and contains no redundant information. Every word earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple with an output schema, but the description lacks parameter documentation, which is essential for correct usage. It does not mention whether the command requires internet or works offline. It is minimally complete for a help tool but leaves gaps.

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 coverage is 0%, meaning the description adds no explanation for the two parameters ('cmd' and 'replace'). The agent receives no guidance on what 'cmd' expects (e.g., a string of the command name) or the effect of 'replace' (e.g., overwriting existing help file). This is a critical 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 clearly states the action ('Retrieve') and the resource ('documentation and usage information for a Stata command'). This distinguishes it well from siblings like 'stata_do' (execute code) and 'get_data_info' (data information).

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 provides explicit context for when to use the tool: 'Use when you need to understand a command's syntax, options, or troubleshoot errors before running it.' It does not specify when not to use it or mention alternatives, but the positive guidance is strong and clear.

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