get_deeptutor_memory_doc

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

Annotations already mark this as readOnly and non-destructive, so the description's extra warning 'do not treat it as verified mastery' adds important behavioral context about data reliability that annotations do not convey. It also clarifies that the document is DeepTutor-generated, which implies it may need scrutiny. No contradiction with annotations.

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 entire description is one short sentence with no filler, and the key behavioral caveat is placed after the core action, keeping the most important information 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?

The tool is a simple getter with a full output schema and two fully documented parameters; the description covers its purpose and the critical reliability caveat. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing given the structured fields.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; both 'key' and 'layer' are already fully described in the schema. The description only refers to L2/L3, which mirrors the enum, without adding new parameter semantics.

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 uses the specific verb 'Read' and names a precise resource: 'DeepTutor-generated L2 or L3 memory document.' The appended caveat 'do not treat it as verified mastery' distinguishes it from the many mastery-related sibling tools, so an agent can select it correctly.

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 clear context about what the tool is for and sets the expectation that its content is not verified mastery, which is important for when to trust it. However, it does not explicitly name an alternative tool or state when to use it instead, so it stops short of full exclusion guidance.

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