get_procedure_step

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the two operational modes (fetch at order or next step) but does not clarify read-only vs destructive, error behavior (e.g., step not found), or any side effects. Some transparency but incomplete.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the key action, and contains no unnecessary words. It efficiently communicates the core functionality.

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?

The tool is simple (3 params, no output schema), but the description lacks return value information and error handling details. The term 'currentOrder' is unclear (likely refers to the 'order' parameter). Adequate but could be improved.

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 67% (order and next have descriptions; id does not). The description adds the phrase 'relative to currentOrder' which ties to the 'next' parameter, but doesn't explain id or add significant meaning beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the tool loads a specific procedure step by 1-indexed order or gets the next step relative to currentOrder. It uses specific verbs ('load') and resources ('step from a procedure'), and the dual behavior distinguishes it from siblings like get_procedure.

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 implies when to use the tool (loading a step or getting the next step), but it does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or contrast with alternatives like match_procedure or refine_procedure. No exclusions or usage contexts are given.

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