better-bear

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe, repeatable read operation. The description adds valuable context about the 'never load everything' constraint and the relationship with index reading, which goes beyond what annotations provide.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place by providing essential information without redundancy.

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 tool's moderate complexity (single parameter, read-only operation) and rich annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint), the description is mostly complete. It explains the tool's purpose, usage context, and constraints well, though it doesn't describe return values (no output schema exists).

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%, so the schema already documents the 'paths' parameter. The description adds examples ('bear/arch-overview.md' or 'external/jira-ticket.md') and clarifies they are 'relative paths', but doesn't provide additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema offers.

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's purpose with specific verbs ('Load the full content') and resource ('specific files from the context library'), and distinguishes it from siblings by mentioning 'after reading the index' (likely referring to bear_context_search) and warning 'never load everything'.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool ('Use after reading the index to load only relevant files') and when not to use it ('never load everything'), and implies alternatives by referencing 'reading the index' (likely bear_context_search).

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