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

readOnlyHint is true and the description consistently describes a read operation with no side effects. It adds useful output context by stating the returned schema definition includes attributes and metadata.

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 concise sentences with no filler or redundant content. The description is direct and easy to parse.

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 description states the return value generally, but does not clarify how include_content=false affects the 'complete schema definition' claim, nor does it mention error scenarios. This leaves minor ambiguity for callers.

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?

Both parameters are described with clear meanings and defaults. The phrase 'full details' helps clarify the purpose of include_content, though the description could more directly tie the parameter to varying output.

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?

Clearly states the tool retrieves full details of a specific schema by UUID, using a specific verb and resource. It is easily distinguished from sibling list/delete/update schema tools.

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?

Implies use when needing a single schema's full definition by UUID, but does not explicitly contrast with schema_list or schema_list_project. The guidance is adequate but not explicit about alternatives.

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