get_xai_methodology

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and discloses key behavioral traits: it's a retrieval operation (implied read-only), returns a comprehensive guide, and emphasizes its preparatory role. It doesn't mention permissions, rate limits, or response format, leaving some gaps.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage timing and content details in two efficient sentences. Every sentence adds value, with no wasted words or 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?

Given the tool's complexity (foundational guide) and lack of annotations/output schema, the description is mostly complete: it covers purpose, usage, and content. However, it doesn't specify the return format (e.g., text, structured data) or potential errors, leaving minor 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?

The tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema coverage, so no parameter information is needed. The description appropriately adds context about the guide's content (workflow, protocol, anti-patterns) without redundant parameter details, exceeding the baseline of 3.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('XAI analysis methodology guide'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'get_glass_floor' or 'standard_briefing' by focusing on the full workflow guide rather than specific components.

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?

It explicitly states when to use this tool ('BEFORE starting any model explanation') and provides context about its role in understanding tool sequences, protocols, and anti-patterns, offering clear guidance without alternatives needed for a foundational resource.

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