expand_analysis_section

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool retrieves content (non-destructive) but does not mention any side effects, auth requirements, or rate limits. It adds some behavioral context by referencing 'stored in memory' and 'tiered responses'.

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 sentences, perfectly concise. The first sentence states the core purpose, the second provides usage guidance. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 is a simple retrieval operation and has no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does and when to use it. It could optionally mention the return format or that it returns the full analysis, but the format parameter already covers output format.

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% coverage, but the description adds meaning by clarifying that the optional 'section' parameter can be omitted to get full analysis and that available sections are listed in the tiered response. 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 clearly states the tool retrieves full analysis content from tiered responses using an expandable ID. The verb 'Retrieve' and 'Expand' are specific, and the description implies a distinct purpose from sibling tools like expand_memory by mentioning 'tiered responses' and 'analysis section'.

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 tells when to use the tool: 'Use this when a tool returns a summary with an expandable ID.' It provides clear context but does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternative tools.

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