get_capture_slice

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavior disclosure burden. It does clarify that this is a non-mutating fetch, that lines are 1-indexed, and that the slice is exact. However, it does not mention the default 'latest' capture_id behavior, invalid-range handling, or what happens when the capture does not exist.

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?

A single sentence with no filler. The core action, resource, key constraint (1-indexed), and purpose are all front-loaded in an efficient way.

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 is adequate for a simple read-only slice operation, and the output schema covers return shape, but it lacks explicit routing among siblings and fails to mention capture_id default behavior or error conditions. It is usable but has clear gaps.

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. It adds useful meaning for start_line and end_line by stating they define a 1-indexed exact range, but it never explains capture_id or its 'latest' default, leaving one of the three parameters under-specified.

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?

States a concrete operation ('Fetches... range of lines'), the resource ('from a capture'), and the intended use ('inspect full context around a match'). The verb and scope distinguish it from sibling tools like search_capture, get_capture_summary, and list_captures even without explicitly naming them.

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 usage after finding a match, so the context is fairly clear, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus search_capture or list_captures, nor does it provide exclusions or alternatives. The guidance is implicit rather than direct.

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