Get app data

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description aligns with this by saying 'Return'. However, the description adds no extra behavioral context beyond the annotations, such as what happens if the data id is missing or how the data is returned. No contradiction exists.

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 wasted words. It immediately communicates the action, resource, and key parameter.

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 one-parameter getter with readOnlyHint, the description plus schema is largely sufficient. It lacks explicit notes about error behavior or the exact nature of 'app data', but the sibling tool names and annotations provide enough context for this straightforward operation.

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 describes data_id with 100% coverage, including an example ('chart_xyz'). The description's phrase 'given data id' adds no new meaning beyond the schema, so the schema does the heavy lifting and 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 uses a specific verb ('Return') and identifies the resource ('stored web-app data') and the key input ('data id'). It clearly states what the tool does, but it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like banana_appdata_put or banana_appdata_delete, so it lacks full differentiation.

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 usage guidance is provided. There is no mention of when to use this tool vs. the related appdata tools (put/delete/form), no prerequisites, and no alternatives. The agent must infer usage from the tool 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.