get_cwe_view

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the return structure (a dictionary with 'Views' array or error information) and provides input examples, which is useful. However, it does not mention side effects, authentication, rate limits, or other behavioral traits beyond the return format, so transparency is only partial.

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 succinct and well-structured, with a one-sentence summary upfront followed by clear Args and Returns sections. Every element is meaningful, with no redundancy or filler.

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 single-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential functionality, parameter format, and return shape. It would be more complete if it differentiated this from sibling tools, but the core operational details are fully specified.

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 provides zero description for the 'ids' parameter, but the description compensates thoroughly. It specifies comma-separated IDs with or without the 'CWE-' prefix, including concrete examples like '1000', 'CWE-1010,1020', and 'all'. This is exactly the semantic detail needed for correct invocation.

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 the tool performs 'Get' on 'CWE views' with support for ID(s) or all views. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_cwe_weakness and get_cwe_category, which operate on different CWE entities.

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 explains the input format (IDs or 'all') but gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like get_cwe_info or get_cwe_weakness. It lacks any exclusions or alternative tool mentions, leaving usage context to be inferred from the name.

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