agno_examples

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states the tool returns complete, runnable Python examples and clarifies these are SDK examples for writing agent code, not deployment. This is sufficient for a read-only retrieval tool, though it omits potential side effects or auth requirements.

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 well-structured with an Args section and a clear return statement. Every sentence is informative and earns its place; no wasted words.

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 (one optional parameter, outputs examples) and presence of an output schema, the description covers the essentials. It explains what the tool returns and its scope, though it could mention error handling or pagination, but that is not critical for this use case.

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 0%, so the description fully explains the single parameter 'category', listing all valid values and the effect of leaving it empty. This adds critical meaning beyond the bare schema definition.

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?

Clearly states it gets SDK code examples for building agents with Agno. The description specifies the return value (complete, runnable Python code) and distinguishes from sibling tool agno_agentos for deployment examples. No ambiguity.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool ('for SDK examples') and when to use the alternative ('agno_agentos for deployment and hosting'). Also instructs to leave category empty to list all categories, providing clear usage guidance.

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