retrieve

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds no additional behavioral traits, such as failure modes or edge cases. Baseline score is appropriate given that annotations fulfill the basic need.

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?

At only six words, the description is extremely terse. True conciseness would include essential details, but here it omits critical context, making it under-specified rather than efficiently compact.

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?

With 11 parameters, no parameter descriptions, a complex sibling suite, and an output schema, the description is grossly incomplete. It fails to explain what constitutes 'lessons', the meaning of 'policy-first' and 'stage-aware', or what the tool returns. This is entirely inadequate for the tool's complexity.

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 description provides no information about any of the 11 parameters, and the schema has 0% description coverage. The agent has no guidance on what parameters like 'step', 'domain', 'namespace', or 'max_tokens' mean or how to use them, severely hampering correct invocation.

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 'Retrieve policy-first, stage-aware lessons' identifies the action (retrieve) and resource (lessons), but the qualifiers 'policy-first' and 'stage-aware' are jargon and not explained. It lacks differentiation from the similar sibling 'learn.retrieve', leaving ambiguity.

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 usage guidance is provided. There is no indication of when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any conditions or prerequisites mentioned. The description is purely functional without context.

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