ContextCapsule

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds valuable behavioral context such as default share behavior (authenticated/reusable vs token-gated/single-use), burn-after-N-reads cap, and expiry defaults, which go beyond annotations without contradicting them.

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 a single concise paragraph that front-loads the key concept and then enumerates use cases and exclusions. It is efficient without being overly terse, though bullet points could improve scanability.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (31 parameters, many enums, no output schema), the description covers purpose, usage guidelines, behavioral nuances, and sibling differentiation. Parameter descriptions in the schema are thorough, so the description doesn't need to detail each action. It provides sufficient context for an AI agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for all 31 parameters. The description adds high-level context like default expiry and multi-use behavior but does not expand on individual parameter meanings beyond what the schema provides. 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?

The description clearly defines the tool as managing context capsules ('portable, shareable, hydrate-on-demand snapshots') and lists specific use cases (e.g., pasting /c/<token> links, handoffs, bootstrapping). It explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool 'context' for normal retrieval.

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 explicitly states when to use ('use capsule when the user pastes a /c/<token> link...') and when not to use ('Do not use capsule for normal turn-by-turn retrieval; use context instead'), providing clear guidance with alternative tool named.

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