get_term_types

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral disclosure burden. It states 'Get all term types' but fails to disclose that results are paginated with a default limit of 10, meaning 'all' is not returned in a single call. It also does not mention read-only status, ordering, or how search interacts with pagination.

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 concise sentence with no filler words. The key verb and resource are front-loaded, making it immediately scannable. It is appropriately sized for a straightforward list endpoint.

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 tool has three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, so the description needs to provide enough context for correct invocation. It omits the critical pagination behavior, such as 'all' requiring multiple pages, and gives no indication of what the response contains. This is a significant gap for a list endpoint with optional pagination.

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%, so the baseline is 3; each parameter already has a clear description in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, and in fact the phrase 'all' could confuse the understanding of the limit parameter. Therefore it neither elevates nor reduces beyond baseline.

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 clear verb 'Get' and a specific resource 'term types', making the core action unambiguous. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like 'list' or 'get', but the resource name 'term_types' differentiates it from priority- and term-related siblings. The word 'all' is slightly misleading given the pagination parameters, so it does not earn a 5.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention pagination or search behavior. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or preferred context. The agent is left to infer usage entirely from the schema.

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