overte_sampling_assist

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the sampling mechanism (ctx.sample), the fallback behavior ('returns structured error otherwise'), and the return format with an example. This provides useful behavioral context beyond the empty annotations.

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 a brief summary, example, and return format spec. Every sentence adds value and it is appropriately concise for a tool of this complexity.

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?

The output schema is present and the description additionally explains the error behavior and provides a concrete example. The tool is fully contextualized for an agent, covering the key aspects of sampling usage and fallback.

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 only 50%: 'goal' is documented, but 'ctx' is not. The description mentions ctx.sample but does not explain what the ctx parameter is or how it should be used, failing to compensate for the schema gap.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('multi-step Overte operation guidance') to define what the tool does. It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like overte_entity_spawn or overte_script_inject by positioning itself as a planning/guidance tool rather than an execution tool.

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 states it is for 'complex goals' and 'multi-step' operations, providing clear context on when to use it. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, but the purpose is clear enough to guide selection.

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