about_narracore

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that this is a information/overview tool with no parameters and no side effects implied, and it names the content it surfaces. It stops short of explicitly confirming read-only behavior, but for a zero-argument overview tool the behavioral surface is inherently minimal.

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?

Two tight, front-loaded sentences: the first defines scope, the second gives the invocation trigger. The trailing 'No parameters' is slight redundancy against the empty schema, keeping it just short of maximal.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail is unnecessary. For a simple zero-arg overview tool, purpose, scope, and invocation trigger are all present; nothing an agent needs is missing.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description restates 'No parameters,' which is redundant with the schema but accurate and harmless.

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?

States a specific resource (the Narracore ecosystem) and what the tool returns: toolkit contents and how it relates to narracore.app and narracore.cn. This is clearly distinguishable from the screenplay-oriented siblings without opening any schema.

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 states the trigger condition: 'Call this when the user asks what else Narracore offers or where to continue the work.' No when-not guidance or alternatives are given, but none are needed since the siblings (format_screenplay, diagnose_scenes) serve entirely different purposes.

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