get_tutorial_path

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, which is consistent. The description adds behavioral detail about detection strategies (frontmatter, links, numeric prefixes) and output structure (chain[] plus strategy). No contradictions.

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 zero waste. The first sentence states the core action, the second adds detection detail and output. 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?

For a tool with no output schema, the description covers input, process (detection methods), and output (chain[] fields + strategy). Minor gap: does not specify what happens if no ordering is detected (e.g., returns empty chain). Still fairly 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 has 0% description coverage for 2 parameters (repo, section_id). The description does not add any meaning beyond the schema; it does not explain what repo and section_id represent or their expected formats. Baseline would be 3 for high coverage, but here low coverage demands compensation.

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 explicitly states it reconstructs an ordered tutorial chain from section_id, and lists detection strategies (frontmatter keys, markdown links, numeric prefixes). This is a specific verb+resource that distinguishes it from siblings like get_section_path or section_neighbors.

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 the tool is for tutorials with ordering markers, but does not explicitly state when to use it vs alternatives like section_neighbors or get_section_context. No when-not guidance is provided.

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