axint.context.docs

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent. Description adds that it writes no files and uses no network, providing extra behavioral context beyond annotations. Consistent 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?

Efficient three-sentence structure with labeled 'Use:' and 'Effects:' sections. Front-loaded with purpose and context, no wasted words.

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 covers when to use and basic effects, and annotations cover safety. With an output schema present, the agent has enough to decide invocation. However, it lacks details on what the returned context contains or how to use it afterward.

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 coverage is 100% with good parameter descriptions. The tool description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it returns 'project-local Axint docs context' and specifies use cases like after chats or compaction. It distinguishes itself from siblings like axint.context.memory by emphasizing 'docs' and avoiding re-reading the whole site, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use: 'after compaction when the agent needs workflow docs without rereading the whole site.' It implies a clear trigger but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to other tools.

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