papertrail_refs_for_path

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behaviors like read-only nature, scope of 'current', and cache staleness. It only mentions caching but omits side effects, permission needs, or result scoping.

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?

Single sentence, very concise but lacks critical detail. Front-loaded with verb, but does not earn its place by providing enough information.

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?

Without output schema or annotations, the description should hint at return values (e.g., types of tracker items). It fails to clarify what a 'tracker item' is or what 'current path' means, leaving significant gaps.

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 0% description coverage, and the tool description adds no explanation for 'path' or 'limit'. The names alone are insufficient to understand expected values or formatting.

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 action (list) and the resource (cached tracker items referencing a current path). It differentiates from siblings like papertrail_for_symbol by focusing on path-based lookup, though 'tracker items' and 'current path' remain somewhat vague.

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 versus alternatives such as papertrail_for_symbol or papertrail_for_chunk. The description lacks context for selection among siblings.

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