huddo_help

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the scope of content returned (connection channels plus the basic lifecycle loop). It is implicitly a read-only, side-effect-free informational tool, though it never states this outright or describes the response shape.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the imperative 'Start here', with every clause enumerating distinct content (transport options, then the core loop). No filler or redundant restatement of the name.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema informational tool, the description tells the agent what it will learn and when to reach for it. It is essentially complete, with only minor ambiguity about whether the output is static docs or dynamic server state.

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 there is nothing to document and the baseline of 4 applies. The description does not need to explain parameter usage.

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 states a specific function: onboarding/help content covering connection methods (MCP server, CLI, skill, llms.txt, /cmd pages) and the join → send → wait loop. The 'Start here' framing distinguishes it from the operational siblings like huddo_join or huddo_send, though it never explicitly says 'this returns documentation/instructions' as a verb.

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?

'Start here' is an explicit directive indicating this should be called first, before the join/send/wait operations it mentions. It gives clear context for use but offers no exclusions or alternatives (e.g., what to call once past setup).

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