pmux_api_guide

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the tool fetches data from the running purplemux and returns markdown. It could mention side-effect-free nature, but the behavior is straightforward for a read-only informational tool.

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 sentences, front-loaded with main purpose, then a crucial clarification. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

For a zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description fully explains what the tool does, what it returns, and how it differs from a sibling. No gaps remain.

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 tool has 0 parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (empty schema). The description adds value by explaining the output format and source, which goes beyond the schema. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and this description meets that.

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 the tool returns the purplemux HTTP API reference as markdown, and distinguishes it from pmux_guide which covers MCP tool usage. It specifies the verb 'return' and resource 'HTTP API reference', with scope 'fetched from the running purplemux'.

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 when to use (for HTTP API reference) and when not to use (for MCP tool orchestration guidance, use pmux_guide). This provides clear decision-making context.

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