territory_get_seller_context

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation but does not mention authentication requirements, despite sibling tools like territory_auth_status and territory_login_browser suggesting such a dependency. It lists return fields but offers no details on side effects, errors, or prerequisites.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource, followed by a parenthetical list of included fields. Every word earns its place, and the structure is clean and readable.

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 parameterless getter, the description clearly indicates what is returned. However, it omits any mention of prerequisites like login or authentication, which could be critical given the sibling auth and login tools. Minor gap, but otherwise complete for its simplicity.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing to describe beyond what the empty schema shows. The description adds no parameter-related information, which is acceptable given the absence of parameters; a baseline of 4 is appropriate.

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 action ('Get') and resource ('seller's active sales context'), and lists specific components (Role, Account Segment, etc.). It is easily distinguished from the sibling setter 'territory_set_seller_context', which performs the opposite operation.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as the setter. While the getter nature implies use when you need the current context, there is no direct guidance on when to retrieve versus set, and no mention of prerequisites or common workflows.

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