get_properties

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It describes the search behavior, filtering modes, and return value (GUIDs for use with GetPropertyValuesOfElements). It does not mention any destructive or side effects, but it is clear that this is a read-only search operation. Missing a note about sorting or pagination beyond limit.

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 clear sections (WHEN TO USE, MODES, Args, Returns, NOTE). It is concise, with no redundant sentences. Each part adds value.

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 tool with 7 parameters and an output schema, the description covers usage comprehensively. It explains the purpose of parameters, the return format, and typical use cases. The note about get_docs prevents confusion. It is complete for an AI agent to use.

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?

Given 0% schema coverage, the description adds meaning to every parameter. It explains search, group, property_type, measure_type, property, and limit with examples and default values. It also shows how to use them in combination.

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's purpose: searching and discovering Archicad element properties. It uses specific verbs like 'search and discover' and explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool 'get_docs' in the final note.

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 provides explicit 'WHEN TO USE' examples and 'MODES' that cover various parameter combinations. It also tells when not to use (for command documentation, use get_docs).

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