Get Best Practices

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

Description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: proprietary data notice, restriction against enumeration, and call limit. It also clarifies scope (best practices vs reference). Annotations already declare readOnly and idempotent, and description reinforces this with practical usage rules.

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 well-structured with three concise paragraphs: purpose, proprietary notice, usage limit. Every sentence adds value, and the most critical information (purpose) is front-loaded. No extraneous text.

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 with no output schema and medium complexity, the description covers purpose, content type, legal restrictions, and usage limits. It does not describe the output format or error behavior, but given the annotations and parameter descriptions, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to use correctly.

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?

All parameters have schema descriptions, and the tool description does not add new semantic meaning to the parameters. The schema already details libraryId formats, topic areas, version scoping, and token limits. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description adds no extra parameter context.

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 fetches 'latest best practices, patterns, and guidelines' and explicitly differentiates from 'generic reference docs'. The verb 'Fetch' and resource description are specific.

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 usage constraints: do not enumerate registry, call max 3 times per question. It contrasts with generic reference docs, but does not explicitly name alternative tools. However, the guidelines are clear enough for an agent to deduce when to use this tool.

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