get_public_resourceRead one current public Plushwipes dataset for product, asset, claim, review, service, policy or opportunity analysis. No private data or credentials are accessed.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| resource | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly communicates read-only behavior and states that no private data or credentials are accessed, which is useful safety context. It does not describe response shape or potential error behavior, but this is less critical for a simple read 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?
The description is compact and front-loaded with the core purpose. Both sentences add meaningful information, and there is no redundant restatement of the tool name or schema.
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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is largely complete: it states what is read, the public scope, and the absence of credential access. It is missing only explicit return-value or selection details between the enumerated categories, which are minor for this tool's complexity.
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 description coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaningful semantic guidance by mapping dataset types to product, asset, claim, review, service, policy, and opportunity analysis. The single 'resource' parameter is still not fully documented per enum value, but the description helps an agent understand what it selects.
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 uses a specific verb ('Read') and identifies the resource as a current public Plushwipes dataset, listing the kinds of analysis it supports. It is clear, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools such as evaluate_opportunity or prepare_activation beyond the general read action.
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?
The description gives clear context for when to use the tool: whenever a current, public, read-only Plushwipes dataset is needed. It also explicitly excludes private data or credential access, but it does not name alternatives or explicitly say when not to use this tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a specific stage: evaluating current state, reading a public dataset, and preparing an activation checklist. There is little or no overlap in their actions or intents.
All tool names follow a clear verb_Noun pattern: evaluate_opportunity, get_public_resource, prepare_activation. Naming style and ordering are consistent across the set.
Three tools is concise but well-scoped for the limited workflow of evaluating and preparing for activation. Each tool fills a distinct role without redundancy.
The set covers the core read-only workflow: assess current standing, examine public data, and prepare an activation checklist. It lacks any tool for actual activation, final submission, or revenue tracking, though those may be intentionally out of scope.