absorb

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

No annotations provided; description fully covers behavior: looks up by slug, returns full markdown, typical length, content type, and fallback suggestion. Could mention any side effects or auth requirements, but none are expected for a read-only knowledge module tool.

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 concise (5 sentences) and well-structured: purpose, content type, usage instruction, behavioral note, and example. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

Even without output schema, the description fully explains the return value (complete markdown content, length range, typical sections). It covers all necessary context for correct invocation.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with description for 'name' parameter. The tool description adds extra value: 'Exact module slug (kebab-case). Get slugs from forage results. Examples: ...' This goes beyond the schema's 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 states 'Load the full content of a knowledge module by its exact name/slug.' It clearly identifies the verb (load) and resource (knowledge module), and distinguishes from sibling 'forage' by specifying 'Use after forage to read a specific module in full.'

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 says 'Use after forage to read a specific module in full.' and 'If not found, suggests using forage to search.' Provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to (fallback) guidance.

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