sketchdex_docs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the default behavior (no topic → index) and the authoritative nature of the content, but gives no statement of read-only safety, response format, or size, which a docs tool could reasonably surface.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded and the topic list is compressed into one sentence with no filler. The single run-on sentence is a bit packed, but every clause maps to a real enum topic rather than padding.

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 one-parameter, non-annotated docs tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description supplies enough to call it correctly: what it returns, what the topics are, and the default. Only the relationship to sketchdex_info is left unstated.

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 100% and the schema already lists every enum value plus the "omit for index / all for whole manual" behavior, which the description largely repeats. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the parameter heavy lifting with negligible added meaning.

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 names the resource ("the manual") and enumerates its contents (install, vault, app, rendering, tools, drawing, troubleshooting), making it clear this retrieves documentation by topic. It stops short of distinguishing itself from the sibling sketchdex_info, which plausibly also serves information.

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?

"For answering the user's questions and fixing problems without guessing" gives a clear use context, and "No topic returns the index" tells the agent what happens on omission. It offers no explicit when-not or alternative-tool routing, so it falls just short of a 5.

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