get_td_class_details

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get information', implying a read operation, but does not reveal any behavioral traits such as side effects, authorization needs, or performance characteristics. The lack of detail leaves the agent guessing about safety and constraints.

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, short sentence that communicates the core purpose and highlights key parameters. It is front-loaded with the essential action and resource, with no wasted words.

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 full schema coverage, the description lacks information about the return value or output format. Without an output schema, the agent is left uncertain about what 'information' is provided. The description does not compensate for this gap, making it incomplete for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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%, providing full parameter details. The description adds 'detailLevel+limit supported', which is redundant given the schema. It does not add new meaning beyond what the parameter descriptions already convey, so 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'information about a TouchDesigner class/module', making the purpose straightforward. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_td_classes' which lists all classes, and 'get_td_module_help' which provides help, by focusing on a specific class. However, it could be more specific about what 'information' entails.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_td_classes' or 'get_td_module_help'. It only implies use when details of a specific class are needed, but lacks exclusions or context about prerequisites or appropriate scenarios.

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