get_td_module_help

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It correctly indicates that the tool retrieves Python help() text and implies a non-mutating read operation, but it does not disclose error behavior for unknown module names, output size, or how detailLevel changes the returned content.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. Every word contributes to identifying the tool's action and target resource.

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 relatively simple read-only help tool with fully documented parameters, the description is mostly adequate. However, with no annotations, no output schema, and overlapping sibling tools, a brief note on when to use it or what happens with invalid input would improve completeness.

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?

The input schema already documents all three parameters, including examples for moduleName and enums for detailLevel and responseFormat, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional parameter-level semantics, making the baseline 3 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?

Description states a specific verb ('Retrieve') and direct object ('Python help() text for a TouchDesigner module or class'), so the action and resource are clear. It does not explicitly contrast with the similar-sounding get_td_class_details, but the help() result type makes the purpose distinguishable.

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?

No guidance is given for when this tool should be used instead of siblings like get_td_class_details, get_td_info, or get_td_classes. The agent must infer the intended use case from the name and description alone.

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