get_phase

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the content of the output (purpose, activities, etc.) but does not disclose error behavior, performance, or other operational details.

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 a single sentence covering the main elements, but it could be more front-loaded by explicitly naming the parameter. Efficient but slightly vague.

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 output schema exists, the return values are documented. However, the description lacks explicit parameter guidance and behavioral details. Adequate for a simple get tool but leaves 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?

The input schema has a single integer parameter 'number' with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not explain that 'number' refers to the phase identifier. The meaning is only implicitly linked through 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 clearly states it returns a 'full spec for a single phase' listing specific aspects like purpose, activities, source firms, and layer focus. This distinguishes it from 'list_phases' and other sibling tools.

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 use for a specific phase, but does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like 'list_phases' for browsing phases or 'get_deliverable' for phase-related items. No when-not or exclusive context provided.

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