get_sutra_context

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one useful behavioral fact, that results are raw with no inference applied, but says nothing about behavior when the number is not found or how neighborhood bounds interact.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the retrieval action comes first and the constraint ('no inference') follows. It is efficient, though the extreme brevity contributes to the gaps in other dimensions.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. However, with 3 parameters at 0% schema description coverage and no usage guidance, the description is too thin to let an agent invoke this confidently relative to its many siblings.

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%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, but it only loosely implies that 'numeric neighbors' corresponds to before/after. It never explains that 'number' is a string identifier (maxLength 32) nor that before/after are bounded neighbor counts of 0-5.

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 states a concrete verb and resource: retrieve numeric neighbors plus raw context metadata. 'Numeric neighbors' distinguishes it reasonably from get_sutra (single item) and search_sutras (querying), though the phrase 'raw context metadata' is vague about what exactly is returned.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no sibling is named as an alternative. The closing phrase 'no inference' hints at a contrast with some inferring operation, but that contrast is never made concrete for the agent.

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