buygit_explain

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and excels. It discloses that the tool uses Claude Haiku 4.5 internally, is gated on ANTHROPIC_API_KEY, and returns a structured error with routing hint when the key is unset. This sufficiently covers behavioral traits.

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?

Two sentences with no waste. First sentence defines purpose and scope; second adds implementation detail and usage instructions. Every sentence adds value.

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 description covers purpose, usage context, dependency, and error handling. An output schema exists (per context signals) but is not shown; however, the description implies a text output. Slight gap in not mentioning the output format explicitly, but still largely 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It partially describes 'focus' by listing license, risk, and usage, but omits the 'overview' enum value. The 'slug' parameter is not explained beyond referencing a listing. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the 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 provides an 'AI-summarised explanation of a BuyGit listing' covering license, risk, and usage. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by noting it should be used after buygit_get_listing when a plain-English digest is wanted instead of raw fields.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use after buygit_get_listing when the user wants a plain-English digest instead of raw fields.' Also mentions dependency on ANTHROPIC_API_KEY and the resulting structured error if unset, providing clear usage context and error guidance.

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