Explain Lampa docs, patterns, or packaging

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

Annotations already mark the tool read-only and idempotent, and the description adds valuable non-obvious behavior: snapshot-only, packaging reads configuration but does not execute gulp/npm, and unknown chapter returns an error listing known ids. This meaningfully extends the structured hints.

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?

Three dense sentences with the core resource and modes front-loaded before details. Every clause earns its place, and there is no filler or redundant restatement of the schema.

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 multi-mode tool with five parameters, three enums, and an output schema, this description is complete: it covers mode selection, parameter interplay, error behavior, side-effect boundaries, and sibling differentiation. An agent has what it needs to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds interaction semantics not present in the schema: chapter vs query when chapter is omitted, omitting both gives the TOC, lang is en or ru, and pattern requires the pattern enum. This materially improves correct invocation.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read written Lampa guides') and enumerates three distinct modes, immediately differentiating itself from list_catalog and search_code. An agent can tell exactly what this tool covers without opening the schema.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use guidance per mode and names alternatives not to use: 'Not a live API catalog (list_catalog) and not grep (search_code)'. It also explains chapter/query fallback behavior, the TOC case, lang default, and the pattern requirement, so selection and invocation conditions are concrete.

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