get_phase_9_guidance

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the return type (markdown-formatted guide) and the content included (objectives, steps, tools, expected outputs), which is sufficient for a read-only guidance retrieval tool. No contradictory or hidden behaviors are indicated.

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 somewhat redundant, repeating 'guidance' and including an Args section for a non-existent schema parameter. It could be condensed to one or two sentences without losing meaning, but it is still reasonably readable.

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 no-parameter tool with an output schema available, the description adequately explains what the tool does and what the returned guide contains. The mention of 'tools to use' and 'expected outputs' gives sufficient context for integrating with the broader phase workflow.

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 0-param baseline of 4 applies. The description mentions 'ctx' in Args, but since this isn't a schema property, it adds minor noise; however, it doesn't mislead about actual parameters.

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 it 'Get detailed guidance for Phase 9: Output Generation and Documentation' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling phase guidance tools by specifying Phase 9 and its focus.

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 clearly implies usage is for Phase 9 by naming the phase directly. It doesn't explicitly exclude other phases or name alternatives, but the phase-specific context is strong enough for an agent to select it correctly.

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