doc_map

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states read-only nature, lacking details on side effects, permissions, or output behavior. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotation safety net.

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 very concise at one line, front-loading the read-only hint. However, it sacrifices necessary parameter explanations, making it too brief for full understanding.

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 the absence of parameter descriptions in the schema and no annotations, the description fails to provide complete context. The output schema exists but isn't leveraged in the description. The tool's role among 23 siblings requires more detail.

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%, and the description does not explain the 'help' or 'oneline' parameters beyond mentioning 'oneline' in parentheses. No clarity on their effects or valid values is given.

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 tool is for an 'overview of the full doc link network' with a verb-like 'doc_map' and indicates it is read-only. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like doc_flow or doc_rollup.

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 '[read-only]' prefix implies safe usage for reading, but there is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as doc_flow or doc_rollup. No exclusions are mentioned.

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