reflens_map

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses token consumption, lossy body handling, untrusted third-party data, and truncation behavior. Lacks mention of idempotency or authentication, but for a read-only digest this is acceptable.

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 informative but slightly verbose. It front-loads the main purpose and uses the remaining sentences for crucial context. Every sentence serves a purpose, but could be tightened slightly without losing clarity.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is remarkably complete: it explains behavior, usage context, limitations, and provides examples. The only minor gap is not explicitly stating the return format, but the digest concept is clear.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds significant value: explains level semantics, provides an example usage (path_glob with level 2), clarifies that path_glob is required in practice for higher levels, and explains the budget_tokens truncation. Goes well beyond schema.

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 returns the 'Tier-1 Intelligence Digest' and specifies the default level 0 as an architecture brief. It distinguishes from siblings like reflens_read for exact source, providing a specific verb, resource, and scope.

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?

Explicit guidance: 'ALWAYS START HERE' for level 0, advises pairing levels 1/2 with a path_glob, warns about token size (100K+ for full repo), and directs to reflens_read for exact source. Also mentions truncation with budget_tokens.

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