get_autopilot_policy

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It clearly states the tool is read-only and explains null policy behavior. It doesn't add details like auth or error conditions, but for a zero-parameter getter this is adequate.

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 three short sentences, front-loads the core information, and every sentence adds value. No fluff or repetition.

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 zero-parameter getter with an output schema, the description fully covers the necessary semantics: what the policy contains and the null case. It also signals the read-only nature, making it 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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is inherently covered. The description adds meaningful context by explaining what fields the policy contains and the meaning of null, exceeding the baseline for parameterless tools.

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 returns the active autopilot policy (min_score, max_per_day, since when) including the null case. This is an informative, specific verb+resource description that distinguishes it from sibling tools like autopilot_queue.

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?

It explains when to use it: to check whether autopilot is on and what thresholds apply. It also clarifies that this is read-only via 'never here', but it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools for reading or modifying policies.

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