raynet_get_bc_phases

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Fetches' clearly signals a read-only operation, and 'with IDs and names' specifies the response content. It does not add caveats about ordering or empty results, but for a parameterless fetch tool this is sufficient transparency.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence states the action, the object, and the returned fields. There is no redundancy, filler, or repetition of the tool name.

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 simple parameterless lookup tool, the description is complete: it names the resource, the domain context, and the return contents. No output schema exists, so the explicit mention of 'IDs and names' fulfills the agent's need to understand what the call returns.

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 takes zero parameters, and the schema is empty with no required fields. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description correctly avoids inventing parameter-related details that would not apply.

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 the specific verb 'Fetches' with a clear resource: 'list of BusinessCase phases'. Adding '(sales pipeline stages)' immediately orients the agent and distinguishes it from generic structure/enumeration tools. An agent can confidently infer what this tool retrieves.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like raynet_get_enumerations, raynet_get_structure, or raynet_full_scan. There is no statement of prerequisites, exclusions, or alternatives. The intended context is only implied by the phrase 'sales pipeline stages'.

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