axint.context.docs

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context: 'reads no files and uses no network', which reinforces the read-only, idempotent nature and clarifies no side effects beyond what annotations provide.

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 concise with two main sentences plus structured 'Use:', 'Inputs:', 'Effects:' sections. Front-loaded with purpose. Some redundancy (e.g., 'durable docs memory' and 'workflow docs'), but overall efficient.

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 tool has 3 parameters, output schema, and rich annotations, the description is mostly adequate but has a gap due to the param mismatch (mentioning cwd not in schema). It explains use cases and side effects, which is sufficient for a read-only tool with output schema.

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 baseline is 3. However, the description mentions 'cwd selects project docs context' but the schema has no 'cwd' parameter; it includes platform, projectName, expectedVersion. This mismatch confuses parameter semantics and fails to add meaningful guidance beyond the schema.

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 explicitly states the tool 'Return the project-local Axint docs context' and explains its purpose: reloading after new chats or context compaction to maintain workflow memory. It distinguishes from siblings like axint.context.memory by specifying 'docs context' and 'workflow docs'.

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 clear usage context: 'use after compaction when the agent needs workflow docs without rereading the whole site.' Also mentions reloading after new chats. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but the guidance is specific and actionable.

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