info

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

No annotations are provided, and the description gives no behavioral details (e.g., read-only nature, side effects, or rate limits). The agent is left to guess whether this tool is safe and what the response contains.

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 short sentence, which is concise. However, it may be too terse for a discovery tool that serves as an entry point, potentially leaving important context unstated.

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's role as a starting point for exploring many sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not explain how parameters interrelate, what output to expect, or how to interpret results for subsequent tool calls.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, fully defining both parameters (level enum with values, target string). The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies the tool as a starting point for progressive discovery of dart-query capabilities, clearly distinguishing it from task-specific sibling tools (e.g., get_task, delete_task). However, it lacks a specific action verb like 'list' or 'explain', relying on the vague 'progressive discovery'.

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" implies this tool should be used first, providing clear context. However, no explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage boundaries.

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