get_roadmap_complete

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description adds value by detailing the combined output (details, bars, lanes, milestones). No contradictions, but no additional behavioral context beyond composition.

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?

Concise and well-structured: front-loaded purpose, bullet-like USE WHEN and FAILS WHEN sections. Every sentence adds value with no 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 one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers return composition and failure handling. Could be more explicit about output format but sufficient for most use cases.

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% for the single parameter 'roadmap_id', with description 'Roadmap ID'. The tool description does not add further meaning; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 explicitly states 'Get complete roadmap in one call. Details, bars, lanes, milestones combined.', clearly defining the tool's purpose. It distinguishes from sibling 'get_roadmap' which is for settings/metadata only.

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?

Provides explicit USE WHEN scenarios ('Full roadmap overview', 'Summarize roadmap X') and a clear exclusion: 'For settings/metadata only, use get_roadmap.' Also notes failure case and recommends alternative list_roadmaps.

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