stenographer_get_brief

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing side effects. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly state that there are no side effects, nor does it mention any potential consequences or required permissions. This partial transparency is insufficient.

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 a single, concise sentence with no redundant words or extraneous information. It efficiently conveys the core purpose without verbose elaboration.

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 description is minimal and lacks essential context. It does not explain what 'live running notes' means, what the output format or content will be, or any special considerations (e.g., whether the session must be active). Since there is no output schema, the description should have provided more detail about the return value, but it does not.

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 only parameter, session_id, is defined in the schema with type and minLength, providing basic expectations. The description adds no additional meaning or context about how the parameter is used (e.g., whether it refers to a session ID, a document ID, or something else), so it does not enhance 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Get') and the object ('live running notes document'), indicating the tool retrieves a brief for a session. However, 'live running notes' is somewhat ambiguous and does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like query_history, though the name and parameter imply session-specific retrieval.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any conditions, prerequisites, or comparisons to sibling tools such as stenographer_query_history or stenographer_capture_status, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate use case.

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