get_guidance

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

Without annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits like idempotency, authorization needs, or data sources. It only says 'Get', implying a read operation, but does not confirm safety, confirm if it requires network access, or describe any side effects. Minimal transparency beyond purpose.

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 that efficiently conveys the core functionality. It could be slightly more structured (e.g., listing examples), but it is concise and front-loads the purpose without unnecessary details.

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?

For a guidance tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description provides the basic purpose but lacks details on behavior, prerequisites, or return information. It is minimally complete but misses context like authentication or pagination, which would enhance understanding.

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 100% coverage with descriptions for all 5 parameters. The description adds some context about the types of guidance (best practices, comparisons, patterns) but does not elaborate on parameter usage beyond what the schema provides. 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 clearly states it retrieves best practices, comparisons, and DRY patterns specific to Terragrunt infrastructure-as-code. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('guidance'), and the distinct topics help differentiate from sibling tools like 'function_reference' or 'cli_reference', though not explicitly.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_hcl_config_reference' or 'search_docs'. The description lists guidance types (best-practices, comparison, pattern) but does not explain contexts where this tool is preferred or when not to use it.

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