get_helpers_are_sub

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, indicating the tool is safe and idempotent. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the filtering condition. It does not describe the return format, pagination, or any side effects, but no contradictions exist.

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 a single sentence that conveys the essential information without any fluff. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to parse.

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 simple get tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It specifies the filtering condition. However, it could be more complete by hinting at the return type (e.g., 'returns a list of helper names'). Still, it adequately serves its purpose.

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 zero parameters, and schema_description_coverage is 100% (vacuously). The description does not need to explain parameters, so the baseline of 4 is appropriate. No additional parameter information is necessary.

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: retrieving all sub-helpers (where is_sub_helper=true). It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('sub-helpers'), and the condition in parentheses distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_helpers_are_tool and get_helpers_not_tool_not_sub.

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 implies when to use the tool (when needing sub-helpers) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or mentions alternatives among siblings. An agent would benefit from knowing that get_helpers_are_tool or get_helpers_not_tool_not_sub exist for different filters.

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