Show plan on a page

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses important behavior: refs are pointers, not content, and the server opens the file itself. It also states the return format (a single URL line). It does not explicitly claim read-only status, but the purpose implies no modifications.

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 a single well-structured paragraph that front-loads the purpose, then provides timing, content limits, and return behavior. Every sentence adds value with no fluff.

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?

Despite complex nested schema for diagram and refs, the description covers essential use, constraints, and return value, especially since there is no output schema. It lacks explicit error handling or exclusions but is sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a crucial clarification that refs are pointers and the server opens the file itself, which goes beyond the schema's descriptions and helps correct usage.

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 identifies the tool as showing a plan on a local web page, using a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like view_report or view_diagram, but the focus on 'plan' makes the purpose evident.

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 instructs to call the tool BEFORE making changes, once an approach is decided. It does not mention when not to use it or alternatives, but the timing advice is precise and actionable.

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