get_goals

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the return structure (array of goals with specific fields) but does not state behavioral traits like authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether it returns only the current user's goals. The read-only nature is implied by the name but not explicit.

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, front-loaded with purpose and output details. Every sentence is essential and concise. No unnecessary words.

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 simple retrieval tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It tells the agent what the tool does, what it returns, and is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds value by explaining what the output contains, which compensates for the lack of schema details. No parameters to document.

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 verb 'Retrieve', the resource 'the user's stored OKR goals', and specifies the output format (array with title, description, targetDate). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_goals (write) and get_technologies (different resource).

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 usage for reading OKR goals, which is clear from the context of sibling tools. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_achievement, leaving some ambiguity for agents with limited context.

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