get_directives_for_helper

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint (true) and idempotentHint (true), so the description does not need to cover these. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context beyond what annotations provide, such as performance considerations or response 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?

Single sentence, no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple lookup tool, though additional context could be included without harming conciseness.

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?

For a 1-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks details on what the returned directives look like (e.g., names, objects) and any pagination or ordering behavior. Annotations cover safety, so the description is minimally 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for the only parameter 'helper_name' (described as 'Helper name'). The description adds no further 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 the tool's purpose: 'Get all directives that use a helper (reciprocal lookup)'. It uses a specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource 'directives that use a helper', distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'get_directive_by_name' or 'get_helpers_for_directive'.

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?

Usage is implied as a reciprocal lookup, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_directive_by_name' or 'get_directives_by_category'. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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