get_codex_prompt

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 behavioral disclosure. The description gives no indication of side effects, read-only nature, performance, or any caveats associated with generating a prompt. This is a significant transparency gap.

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 concise and front-loads the primary purpose in a single sentence. However, the sentence is somewhat cryptic due to the undefined 'Codex' term, and the structure could benefit from a brief clarification of what the prompt is used for.

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 a minimal description, no output schema, and no annotations, this tool description is incomplete. Given the existence of several sibling analysis tools, the description fails to provide sufficient context to distinguish its output and usage, especially for an agent that might not know what 'Codex ingestion prompt' means.

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 mentions the single parameter implicitly ('for an analysis'), but with 0% schema coverage, it doesn't add any meaning beyond the schema's basic 'analysis_id' string type. It doesn't explain what the analysis_id represents or how to obtain it, leaving the agent without sufficient parameter context.

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 states the tool gets a Codex ingestion prompt for an analysis, which is specific to the 'prompt' resource and distinguishes it from other analysis-related tools like get_analysis and get_report. However, the term 'Codex ingestion prompt' is opaque without further explanation of what makes it a Codex-specific prompt, so the purpose is only partially clear.

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?

There is no guidance on when this tool should be used versus alternatives like get_analysis or get_report. The description doesn't clarify the relationship between a Codex ingestion prompt and other analysis outputs, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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