expand_analysis_section

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds meaningful context about the tiered-response mechanism and that content is stored in memory, complementing the annotations. No contradiction found.

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 two concise sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the action and resource, while the second adds the usage trigger and the option to expand specific sections. 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?

Given the tool's read-only nature, full schema coverage, and low complexity, the description is largely complete. It covers what the tool retrieves, the expandable ID mechanism, and when to use it. Minor omissions like error behavior or output size are not critical for this simple retrieval tool.

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 100%, so all three parameters are already documented with adequate descriptions. The description reiterates the expandableId and optional section but does not add substantial new parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 opens with 'Retrieve full analysis content from tiered responses,' which names a specific verb and resource. It further clarifies scope by stating it can expand the entire analysis or specific sections, distinguishing it from sibling tools like expand_memory.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when a tool returns a summary with an expandable ID,' giving a clear trigger condition. However, it does not name alternatives or describe when not to use the tool, so it falls short of a perfect score.

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