Get Document References

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

Annotations already indicate safety and idempotency. Description adds specific behavioral details: exact whole-word, case-insensitive matching, no AI, and the requirement of an open project, going beyond structured fields.

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?

Three efficient sentences with no filler. Front-loaded with action and key details. 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 presence of an output schema, the description appropriately focuses on what the tool does and edge cases (empty returns). Covers all needed context for a simple lookup 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?

The single parameter 'documentId' is well-described in the schema. The description adds value by hinting that the UUID comes from 'get_structure', aiding the agent in obtaining the correct input.

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?

Description clearly states the tool lists registered characters and locations mentioned in a document with counts and locations, distinguishing it from siblings like 'find_mentions' and 'get_referencing_documents' by focusing on registered entities from the project's registries.

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?

Provides a concrete use case ('see a scene's cast and settings at a glance') and mentions boundary conditions, but does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool or name alternative tools for similar tasks.

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