snipara_get_chunk

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

Description reinforces annotations with 'read-only VIEWER operation and changes no project state.' It also discloses return contents: chunk text, source identity, position metadata, and bounded error result. This adds value beyond annotations by detailing output structure.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. First sentence states the core action. Second sentence provides usage guidance and a brief summary of return values. Highly efficient.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, when to use it, what it returns, and how it differs from siblings. For a simple fetch-by-ID tool, this is complete.

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 detailed descriptions for both parameters. Description adds minor context for chunk_id (its source) but does not significantly enhance understanding beyond the schema. 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?

Description states 'Fetch one complete indexed source chunk by the stable chunk ID returned from a reference-based context query.' It specifies the verb (Fetch), resource (chunk), and source of the ID. It also distinguishes the tool from snipara_read by noting its use for exact document line ranges.

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?

Description explicitly states when to use this tool: after snipara_context_query to fetch a chunk by ID. It also provides an alternative: use snipara_read for exact line ranges. This clearly guides the agent on tool selection.

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