get_index

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the kind of information returned, but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, whether it has special permissions or rate limits, what errors may occur, or what the overall response format looks like.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The parenthetical list is reasonably informative, though 'etc.' is vague and the description could be tightened by naming the key result elements more precisely.

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?

For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is only minimally complete. It gives partial metadata examples but does not specify the return format, define what 'index' means, or explain how it differs from the many related sibling tools, leaving an agent to guess.

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?

The schema provides full coverage for the only parameter, tref, including an explanatory example. The description adds very little parameter-specific meaning beyond restating that the tool concerns a specific text, so the schema already does the heavy lifting.

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 names the operation as 'Get metadata about a specific text' and gives concrete examples of that metadata: structure, versions, categories. However, it does not differentiate this tool from sibling tools like get_toc, get_versions, or get_category, so an agent could confuse it with those.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for retrieving metadata about a text, but it does not mention when to prefer get_index over get_toc, get_versions, or get_category, nor does it state any exclusions.

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