Get GoalSlot account context

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

Annotations already mark it read-only and non-destructive; the description adds that it is 'Cheap and side-effect free' and that it should be re-called after long conversations to avoid stale data. It also clarifies that the returned date and category values must not be guessed, providing additional behavioral nuance beyond the 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 front-loaded with the most critical instruction ('READ ONLY' and 'Call this first') and then provides a compact list of returned facts, followed by warnings. Each sentence contributes value, and the structure guides the agent clearly from invocation to handling of results.

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?

Given that there is no output schema, the description is the only source of return information, and it enumerates the key facts (user, plan limits, category values, timezone, date, week window, timer). It also covers the use-after-long-conversation nuance, making it fully sufficient for the agent to correctly invoke and interpret this tool.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description correctly says nothing about input semantics. The schema coverage is trivially 100%, and the description focuses on output context rather than inputs, which is appropriate for a parameterless tool. Baseline 4 is earned because there is no parameter documentation needed.

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 tool's function: it retrieves the GoalSlot account context, enumerating the specific data it returns (signed-in user, plan limits, category values, timezone, etc.). It distinguishes itself from siblings by being the foundational context-gathering tool, and the imperative 'Call this first' reinforces its unique role.

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 explicitly instructs when to use it: 'Call this first, before any other GoalSlot tool, in every session' and 'Call it again after a long conversation rather than relying on a stale copy.' It also warns against assuming the date or inventing category values, clarifying that this tool is the authoritative source for those facts, leaving no ambiguity about when to invoke it.

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