check_reference

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

No annotations provided; description discloses the tool is cheap and returns no content, which suggests non-destructive behavior. It adds version behavior hint but lacks detail on return format or side effects.

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, efficient and to the point. Every word adds value, though a more structured approach could improve readability.

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?

Missing explanations for return value (e.g., boolean or timestamp), parameter meanings, and broader usage context. For 3 parameters with no output schema and no annotations, more detail is needed.

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%; description only adds meaning for the version parameter ('omit version for the latest'). Tech and topic parameters are not explained beyond their names, which are vague.

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?

Description clearly states the tool performs an existence/freshness check and notes it returns no content. It distinguishes from siblings that likely provide content or search, but does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

Implies use when a lightweight check is needed ('cheap') and when content is not required ('no content'). However, it does not specify when to use siblings like get_reference or search_reference, nor does it give explicit when-to-use or 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.