clawhub_get_moderation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states what data is retrieved, without mentioning any side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or that it is a read-only operation.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose and required parameter. It is appropriately short and front-loaded, though it could optionally include additional context without becoming verbose.

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 simple tool with one required parameter and no output schema or annotations, the description provides an adequate overview of the return data (verdict, reasonCodes, evidence). However, it lacks detail on response structure or potential error conditions.

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 schema has one parameter (slug) with minLength:1 but no description for it, yielding 0% schema description coverage. The description says 'Required: slug' but does not clarify what slug represents (e.g., skill ID or name) or its format, adding minimal semantics beyond the schema.

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 it retrieves moderation details (verdict, reasonCodes, evidence) for a skill, requiring a slug. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('moderation details for a skill'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_skill or get_scan which serve different purposes.

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 indicates the requirement for 'slug', which is a necessary condition for use. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., clawhub_get_skill) or any exclusions.

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