assemble_prompt

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

No annotations provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It describes the return value and orchestration but does not disclose side effects, safety, or performance characteristics. The read-only nature is implied but not explicit.

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 with no fluff. First sentence defines purpose and output; second sentence provides key parameter usage. Every word 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 no output schema, the description thoroughly lists the components of the returned prompt and handles both parameters. It covers the essential information for an agent to understand what the tool returns and when to use parameters.

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 coverage is 100% and the description adds meaningful context beyond the schema: include_query_agent_extras is linked to non-query agents, compact is for local models. This adds semantic value.

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 'Assembles the complete system prompt by orchestrating all static and dynamic tools', specifying verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes from sibling tools (which provide individual components) by being an orchestrator.

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 provides explicit guidance on parameter usage ('Set include_query_agent_extras=false for non-query agents'), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_database_schema. Context implies usage for full prompt assembly.

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