get_context_pack

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

No annotations provided, so description full burden for behavioral cues. Adds quota consumption and mentions cited/checksummed output, but does not state read-only nature or side effects beyond quota. Some context but not comprehensive.

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?

Two concise sentences: first defines tool output, second adds quota info. Slightly dense jargon ('basemouse.context_pack.v1') but efficient overall.

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?

No output schema provided, yet description only vaguely describes output as 'grounded JSON with provenance' without specifics. Lacks details on return structure, error cases, or authentication needs beyond quota mention. Incomplete for a 5-parameter tool.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 5 parameters. Description does not add any additional parameter meaning or interaction context beyond schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states it generates a 'cited, checksummed' context pack JSON with provenance. While it does not explicitly distinguish from siblings 'search' and 'upsert_document', the unique purpose of generating a pack is evident.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The only usage note is about quota consumption, which is a constraint rather than a decision criterion.

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