get_artifacts_for_task_context

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses default artifact types and behavior of include_archived. Does not state read-only nature or error handling, but the operation is intuitively read-only.

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 plus bullet notes, no fluff. Information is front-loaded: purpose first, then usage sequence, then param notes. Every sentence is necessary.

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?

Given 3 parameters, no output schema explanation needed (has output schema), the description covers when to call, defaults, and key parameter behavior. Missing error scenarios, but overall sufficient for a load tool.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3. Description adds value by clarifying default artifact_types (practice/rule/prompt, excludes result) and providing guidance on include_archived ('only when you need historical context').

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 uses a specific verb ('Load') and resource ('artifacts for a task context'), and distinguishes the tool from siblings by focusing on loading context-specific artifacts. It further clarifies defaults and parameter usage.

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?

Explicitly states when to call (after selecting/creating task context, before work, re-call for new phases). Lacks explicit when-not-to-call or comparison with sibling tools like search_artifacts, but the context is clear.

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