snippets_loc

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that output includes matched terms in braces, surrounding sentences, and a citation URL, providing a good mental model for the tool's behavior.

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 extremely concise with three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, usage context, and a clear limitation. Front-loaded with key action.

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 low complexity (2 required params, full schema coverage, output schema present), the description adequately covers what, when, and how. Minor gap: no mention of error handling or edge cases, but not critical for this tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add significant detail beyond the existing schema descriptions for 'reference' and 'query', thus meeting but not exceeding expectations.

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 'Show a query in context on one page' with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings by noting it's a cheap way to judge results without downloading, and explicitly excludes whole items, clarifying its scope.

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 clear usage context by stating it's 'the cheap way to judge a search result without downloading it' and explicitly notes 'not for a whole item.' While sibling tools are not named, the guidance is sufficient to differentiate scenarios.

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