Docs home

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety and scope are covered. The description adds that the payload is static orientation content (source registry + workflow guidance) rather than live data, which is mildly useful but no richer than the annotations themselves.

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?

Eleven words, front-loaded with the tool's identity and immediately followed by its call-to-action. Every fragment earns its place with no filler.

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?

With no parameters, no output schema, and annotations covering the safety profile, the description carries almost the whole burden and does state what the agent gets back. A hint about the format of the orientation payload would close the remaining gap.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the schema carries no semantics for the description to supplement. Baseline 4 applies; nothing is missing or misleading on this dimension.

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?

'Orientation' names a specific resource type, and the description enumerates its content: registered llms.txt sources plus search/fetch guidance. It is distinguishable from list_doc_sources, which presumably only lists sources, but the overlap is not explicitly resolved.

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?

'Call this first' supplies an explicit ordering directive that tells the agent when to reach for this tool relative to the six sibling doc tools. No when-not condition or named alternative is offered, so it stops short of the top band.

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