get_tactical_summary

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

No annotations provided, but description discloses it's a read-only digest with predicted outcomes, threats, and pending actions. Could mention it's non-destructive, but sufficient context.

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 lists content, second gives usage guidance. Front-loaded and efficient.

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 one parameter and no output schema, description adequately covers purpose, usage, and content. Could slightly improve by explicitly stating it's read-only and the role of connection_id, but still complete for a summary tool.

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 0% and description adds no information about the single parameter connection_id. Parameter is self-explanatory, but description fails to compensate for missing schema details.

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 a precomputed digest of attack opportunities, threats, and MOVED status units, with specific verb+resource and distinct from siblings like simulate_attack.

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 'Call once per turn-start instead of many simulate_attack / get_threat_map calls', providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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