get_phase_6_guidance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It mentions returning a markdown guide and the purpose, but it does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or has no side effects. However, given its nature as a guidance retrieval, the absence of side effect disclosure is understandable.

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 concise and well-structured, with a clear purpose statement and breakdown of what the guide includes. The Args/Returns sections add a little noise but are not excessive.

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?

The description provides sufficient detail for a simple zero-parameter guidance tool. It lists the content areas (objectives, steps, tools, expected outputs) and the return format. It could mention the context in which to use the phase, but the name already conveys Phase 6.

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?

There are zero parameters in the schema, so the baseline is 4. The description's mention of a 'ctx' argument in the docstring is not reflected in the schema, but since the tool takes no user-facing parameters, there is nothing additional to explain.

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 function: 'Get detailed guidance for Phase 6: Threat Identification.' It uses a specific verb ('get') and names the exact resource (Phase 6 guidance), which distinguishes it from sibling phase guidance tools for other phases.

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 the tool is for Phase 6 guidance but does not explicitly say when to use it versus alternatives like other phase guidance tools. No exclusion criteria or context is provided, though the phase is clear from the name.

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