describe_capabilities

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. Description adds behavioral context by describing the tool as a map and mentioning orientation, consistent with read-only nature. Does not disclose additional side effects, but annotations cover the safety profile adequately.

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 concise sentences front-load the purpose, then add supplementary information about toolsets and alternatives. Every sentence adds value; no redundancy or wasted phrases.

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 zero parameters and presence of output schema, description adequately covers what the tool returns (tool groups, conventions) and how to use it for orientation. It is complete for its intended role as a high-level overview 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?

No parameters in input schema (0 params), so description has no obligation to add param info. Baseline 4 is appropriate. The description does not mention parameters, but none exist to clarify.

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 provides a high-level map of server tool groups and conventions, aiding orientation before first call. It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly naming alternative tools for specific use cases: get_session_snapshot for live state, analyze_mix for mix problems.

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 advises using this tool for initial orientation before first call. It provides clear when-not-to-use guidance by directing to get_session_snapshot for current live state and analyze_mix for mix problems, with no ambiguity.

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