agda_retrieve_contexts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It only discloses batching; it says nothing about the async/job-handle behavior, timeout and deferral semantics, what happens with invalid goal handles, or whether results are ordered per goal.

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; the scope constraint is stated first and nothing is repeated.

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 6-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, one sentence is not enough. An agent still lacks the return shape (how contexts map to each goal handle), the async/defer contract, and how this relates to agda_retrieve_goals versus agda_retrieve_context.

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 83%, so the schema already documents goals, async, timeoutMs, includeRaw, and deferAfterMs. The description adds only the batching context for goals and nothing for rewrite (which lacks a schema description) or the other parameters, so baseline 3 applies.

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 (retrieve) and resource (types and local contexts) scoped to 'several goal handles'. The 'several ... one round trip' framing implicitly distinguishes it from the singular sibling agda_retrieve_context, but never names that sibling 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?

The phrase 'in one round trip' implies this is the batch variant to use when multiple goals need contexts, which is useful implied guidance. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not rule, no mention of the singular agda_retrieve_context alternative, and no preconditions such as needing loaded goals.

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