fablecut_docs

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

The description indicates a read-only retrieval operation ('Return the documentation'), but does not explicitly state it has no side effects. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden; it successfully conveys the non-destructive nature through context.

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?

Two clear sentences plus a token tip. Front-loaded with purpose, no superfluous words. Every sentence earns its place.

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 simple documentation retrieval tool with one optional parameter, the description covers purpose, usage, and filtering. It could mention what happens if a section is not found, but given the lack of output schema and low complexity, it is adequately complete.

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 description adds significant value beyond the schema: explains the substring match behavior, provides concrete examples (props, Recipes, Remake), and offers a token-saving tip. This fully compensates for the schema's brief parameter description.

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's purpose: 'Return the FableCut project schema documentation'. It lists specific content areas (clips, tracks, props, etc.) and distinguishes itself from sibling tools which handle project data manipulation or analysis.

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?

Explicitly advises 'Read this before editing', indicating when to use this tool (before making edits). The token tip provides optimization guidance. While alternatives are not named, the context signals show siblings operate on projects, not documentation.

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