get_view

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint, providing safety profile. The description adds value by revealing the internal data source and clarifying that the default read endpoint does not return filter/sort/group state.

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 well-structured with sections for data source, fields list, and usage guidance. Every sentence is informative and necessary, with no verbosity.

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 lacking an output schema, the description provides a detailed breakdown of return fields and their structure. It also explains the internal endpoint and rationale, making it complete for typical use. Minor deduction for not describing error behavior or edge cases.

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% and description does not add new meaning beyond the schema for parameters appId, viewId, and debug. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description does not elaborate on parameter specifics.

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 that the tool reads a view's live configuration, listing specific return fields (filters, sorts, columnOrder, etc.). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like update_view_filters by noting its use for auditing before modifications.

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?

Explicitly recommends using this tool before update_view_filters, apply_view_sorts, and update_view_group_levels to audit current state. Also explains why the standard read endpoint is insufficient and why a prior get_view call is necessary for safe merging.

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