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 of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Retrieve constraints' without revealing whether the operation is read-only, whether it can block (despite async parameters), error behavior, or the nature of the returned data. This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the core purpose. It is appropriately terse and every word contributes to conveying intent, though it sacrifices contextual depth for brevity.

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 in the complex Agda domain, this description is under-specified. With no output schema and no annotations, an agent needs more context about what 'constraints' means, what constitutes an 'active module', and what the response contains. The schema covers parameters, but overall tool semantics are incomplete.

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% with all five parameters documented individually, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the schema, merely referencing the workspace indirectly. It does not enhance understanding of async, includeRaw, or deferAfterMs.

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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') and specifies a distinct resource ('constraints for the active module in a workspace'), clearly differentiating it from sibling tools like agda_retrieve_goals and agda_retrieve_context. It conveys exactly what the tool does.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites such as loading a module first. It only states the action without contextual cues or exclusions.

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