Get Harm Source Filter Options

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds that it returns a JSON array of available filter values, but fails to explain what 'harm sources' or 'filter values' entail. No contradictions 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 description is repetitive and contradictory, mixing two different purposes. It includes full endpoint path which is not necessary. Not concise.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should explain the return structure. It only says 'JSON array of available filter values' without details on the array elements or how to use the output. The context of 'harm sources' is not explained.

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 full parameter descriptions (100% coverage). The description only reiterates that project_id is required, adding no new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 starts by stating it returns harm sources for filtering near misses, then incorrectly states it fetches full details of a specific Incident by identifier, which is a different operation. This inconsistency makes the tool's purpose unclear.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is a sibling tool (get_harm_source_filter_options_project_v1_0) but the description does not differentiate. No when-not-to-use or conditions are mentioned.

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