kiasumiles_agent_guide

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states 'Return guidance', implying a read-only operation, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or whether the guidance is static or dynamic. This is insufficient.

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 a single short sentence with no unnecessary words. However, it could be more structured to include key points like output format or usage context without sacrificing brevity.

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 zero parameters and an existing output schema, the description is minimal. It does not explain what the guidance contains or how to interpret it. With no annotations and a vague purpose, the description is not complete enough for an agent to confidently invoke the tool in the right context.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. With no parameters, the description cannot add meaning beyond the schema. Baseline is 4, and the description is acceptable for a no-parameter tool, though it adds nothing about the output.

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 states 'Return guidance for the persistent local KiaasuMiles workflow.' It identifies a verb ('Return') and a resource ('guidance for the persistent local KiaasuMiles workflow'), but 'guidance' is vague and does not specify what kind of guidance or its scope. It does not clearly distinguish from sibling tools like 'kiasumiles_configure' or 'kiasumiles_lookup'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given siblings like 'kiasumiles_configure' and 'kiasumiles_recommend_stack', the description should explain what situation calls for returning guidance, but it provides no context or exclusions.

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