getContextHelp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It accurately describes the tool as providing information, which is clearly non-destructive. While it lacks explicit safety notes, the simplicity of the tool (no params, no mutations) makes this sufficient.

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 wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose ('Get information...') and efficiently adds contextual guidance about related tools and configuration, making every sentence earn 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 simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description is complete. It explains its purpose, suggests when to use siblings, and provides practical advice for managing IDs. No additional information is needed.

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?

There are no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds value beyond the empty schema by explaining what the tool returns and how it fits into the larger workflow, though it doesn't need to document non-existent parameters.

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 'Get information about how to find project and connection IDs,' which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like listConnections (which discovers MCP-enabled pairs) by focusing on informational guidance rather than executing queries or modifications.

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 when-to-use context (finding project/connection IDs) and references an alternative tool (listConnections) for discovering MCP-enabled pairs. It also advises on setting defaults and passing IDs per tool call, covering both usage scenarios and best practices.

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