get_dhatu_forms

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, lowering the burden. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: 'Missing forms do not imply invalidity' warns that empty results are meaningful, and 'No generation or prefix composition' clarifies retrieval-only behavior. The pagination note is also useful.

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-loaded with the core purpose followed by two important caveats. It avoids waste, though the phrase 'paginate all sources' is slightly cryptic and could be clearer.

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 tool with 13 parameters, 0% schema description coverage, and many enum-constrained fields, the description is incomplete for correct invocation. While an output schema exists and annotations cover safety, the missing usage guidance and parameter semantics leave significant gaps.

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 description coverage is 0% for 13 parameters, so the description must carry the full explanatory burden. It does not describe any parameter (e.g., query, by, pada, lakara, limit, offset) or how filters interact. The single mention of 'paginate' is far too vague to compensate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('stored finite and kṛdanta paradigms'), making the tool's function clear. It distinguishes itself from generative tools by explicitly excluding 'generation or prefix composition,' though it does not name a specific sibling alternative.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like get_dhatu, search_dhatus, or get_form_coverage. The caveat 'Missing forms do not imply invalidity' is useful but does not tell the agent when to select this tool over alternatives.

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