Read pinned anyCreature authoring guidance

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful context that it reads a 'bounded' section and does not run or extract the compiler, which clarifies the non-execution behavior. It doesn't add much beyond that, but the annotations carry the main burden.

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 no wasted words. The core action and resource are front-loaded, and the clarifying 'does not run or extract the compiler' is placed second. Every sentence earns its place.

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 tool has a single parameter with an enum, an output schema, and read-only annotations, so the description doesn't need to explain return values or safety. However, it doesn't explain what the sections contain or how an agent would know which section to request, which is a meaningful gap for a guidance-reading tool. The output schema may cover return structure, but the selection semantics are left to the enum names.

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%, so the description must compensate for the 'section' parameter. The description says 'bounded syntax or workflow section' which maps to the enum values, but it does not explain what each enum value (overview, syntax, low, mid, high, delivery) means or how to choose one. The enum itself provides the allowed values, but the description adds minimal semantic guidance beyond 'bounded section'.

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 a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('bounded syntax or workflow section from the verified anyCreature 1.3.1 payload'), which clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tools that search/download assets. It could be slightly stronger by naming a sibling it is not, but the 'does not run or extract the compiler' clause helps differentiate it from compiler-related operations.

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 when to use it: when you need authoring guidance for anyCreature 1.3.1, and the 'does not run or extract the compiler' clause tells the agent what it won't do. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or mention any exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage context from the section enum.

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