section_neighbors

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

The description adds value beyond readOnlyHint annotation by disclosing the limited fields returned (id, title, level, doc_path) and that no content is included. This helps the agent understand the tool's scope.

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 concise sentences that immediately state function and use case. Every phrase is informative with no redundancy.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose and output fields but lacks explicit output structure details. However, for a simple navigation tool with no output schema, this is mostly adequate.

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 descriptions already cover both parameters (repo, section_id). The description adds context by mentioning that section_id comes from get_toc or search_sections, aiding correct parameter usage.

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 returns prev/next siblings, parent, and first child for a section, specifying the exact fields handled (id, title, level, doc_path). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_section and search_sections by emphasizing fast sequential navigation without content.

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 explicitly says use this tool for fast sequential navigation without re-querying search_sections, providing a clear use case. It implies when not to use (e.g., when content is needed, use get_section) but does not explicitly list alternatives.

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