agda_retrieve_constraints

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, yet it says nothing about blocking versus job-handle behavior, timeouts, or error conditions even though the parameters (async, deferAfterMs, timeoutMs) reveal this is a potentially long-running, deferrable call. The only behavioral fact added is the 'active module' scope.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler and no redundancy. It is efficient, though its brevity leaves the guidance gaps noted elsewhere.

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 tool with async deferral, timeouts, and no annotations or output schema, the description never explains what a constraint result looks like or how the job-handle path behaves. It is too thin for the tool's operational complexity, even though the schema covers the parameters.

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 description coverage is 100%, so every parameter (async, timeoutMs, workspace, includeRaw, deferAfterMs) is already documented in the schema, which sets the baseline at 3. The description adds only the notion of an 'active module' and no per-parameter meaning.

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 gives a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('constraints') scoped to 'the active module in a workspace', so an agent can tell what it returns. It does not differentiate itself from close siblings such as agda_retrieve_goals or agda_retrieve_context, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this rather than agda_retrieve_goals, agda_retrieve_context, or agda_query_metavariables, and no prerequisites or exclusions are given. The agent must infer the choice entirely from the tool name.

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