cellc_constraints

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states the tool retrieves data (obligations and errors) and that summary is default, but it does not mention whether it is read-only, if it requires special permissions, or if there are rate limits. Basic behavior is implied but not thoroughly explained.

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 very short (one sentence), which is concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. However, it is too brief and lacks structure such as usage hints or parameter info. Every part earns its place, but more content is needed for effective communication.

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 has 4 parameters, no schema descriptions, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely lacking. It does not explain return values, parameter roles, or when to use the tool. The description is insufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly without additional context.

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 0%, meaning no parameter descriptions exist. The description adds no meaning to any of the four parameters (full, path, source, target_profile). It does not explain how these parameters affect the output or what values are expected.

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 that the tool retrieves verifier obligations and runtime-error registry for a contract, and mentions that summary is the default mode. This distinguishes it from siblings like cellc_check or cellc_explain, which likely focus on different aspects. However, it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'list', which slightly reduces clarity.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling tools. There is no mention of when-not-to-use or alternatives. The only hint is 'Summary by default', but this is more about behavior than usage context.

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