Stack-Kontextpaket erstellen

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

The description goes beyond the annotations by disclosing that it 'führt keine Komponenten aus und liest weder Geheimnisse noch Live-Zustände.' This adds critical behavioral context not present in the readOnlyHint or idempotentHint annotations, fully aligning with and enriching 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 two sentences, front-loads the main purpose, and every clause adds value (purpose, read-only nature, exclusions). It is concise without unnecessary elaboration.

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 low-complexity tool with two well-documented params and strong annotations, the description sufficiently covers purpose, safety profile, and behavioral exclusions. It does not describe return format, but the term 'Kontextpaket' and the level parameter (in schema) provide reasonable context, making it adequately complete.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-specific details, but it clarifies the stack manifest source for stackId, which is consistent with schema. No additional semantic value is provided 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 a specific action ('Erstellt ein kompaktes, rein lesendes Kontextpaket') with a specific resource ('aus einem registrierten Stack-Manifest'). It differentiates from sibling tools by emphasizing read-only behavior and non-execution, making the tool's function unambiguous.

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 the tool is for safe, read-only context retrieval without executing components, which suggests when to use it. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools (e.g., controlcenter_describe_stack) or provide exclusion criteria, leaving usage context somewhat vague.

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