Lexicon View

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It implies a safe read ('view', 'readout', 'Read it') and discloses the 'since' scoping constraint, but says nothing about permissions, rate limits, or whether the aggregate readout is cached/live.

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, but the middle is a dense run-on enumerating readout sections with parentheticals, making it hard to scan. Several clauses could be tightened without losing meaning.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described and the content enumeration is a bonus. However, three of four input parameters are undocumented, which is a real gap for an agent trying to filter the readout.

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 0% for 4 parameters. The description explains only 'since' (with an example) and leaves 'who', 'craft', and 'project' entirely undefined in both schema and text, so it does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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 enumerates what the readout contains (entries by craft/outcome, share of trade words by month, new entries per week, unmapped entries, newest ten), which conveys the resource. But it never states a clean verb+scope ('view the lexicon'), relies on the poetic 'vocabulary as a readout,' and gives no hint it differs from lexicon_find or lexicon_note.

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?

'Read it at the start of a session to speak the person's language' is explicit timing guidance for when to invoke it. It stops short of naming alternatives or when-not-to-use (e.g. vs lexicon_find), so it is clear context without exclusions.

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