akb_help

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose expected behavior: no-argument calls return an overview, and drill-downs return details and examples. It stops short of describing output format, but the core behavior is clearly communicated.

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 short, purposeful sentences. The core purpose is front-loaded, followed directly by actionable invocation instructions. 'START HERE' is high-value guidance, not filler.

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?

The tool is simple, the schema already covers topic and vault semantics including the vault-skill edge case, and the description covers invocation modes. The only minor gap is lack of output-presentation detail, but that is not essential for selecting or invoking a help 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters thoroughly. The description echoes the category/tool/workflow distinction that matches the topic parameter, adding slight orientation, but does not need to repeat schema details. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb ('Get help') and resource ('AKB tools and workflows'), making it clear this is a meta/help tool distinct from the operational sibling tools. It also signals its role as the entry point for new AKB users.

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 tells the agent how to invoke it: call with no arguments for an overview, then drill down into categories or specific tools. 'START HERE if you're new to AKB' provides clear selection guidance, and since this is the only help tool, exclusions are unnecessary.

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