show_knowledge

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavior. The description only says 'displays', implying read-only, but omits details about side effects, permissions, or what happens when the optional category parameter is omitted.

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 sentence, including a version number. It is concise and front-loaded with the main purpose, though the version number is unnecessary and could be replaced with more useful information.

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?

Given the tool has one optional parameter, no annotations, and no output schema, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain the output format, behavior when no category is provided, or how it differs from related tools like query_knowledge_base.

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% for the single parameter 'category', which includes an enum. The parameter description 'Categoria a visualizar' adds minimal meaning beyond the schema. The description text lists some categories but misses 'services', creating slight inconsistency.

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 clearly states the tool displays metrics and data from the KnowledgeBase, listing specific categories (patterns, solutions, quality metrics). However, it does not differentiate itself from sibling tool 'query_knowledge_base', which likely has a similar purpose.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like query_knowledge_base. There is no indication of prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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