get_material_spools

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

With no annotations provided, the description must convey behavioral traits. It correctly signals a read-only listing operation with 'List all physical spools,' but it does not disclose any filtering, sorting, pagination, or whether empty/archived spools are included. This leaves a moderate transparency gap.

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 concise and front-loaded: the main purpose is stated in the first sentence, followed by a minimal Args section. Every word contributes value without unnecessary length.

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?

Given the single required parameter and the presence of an output schema, the description is largely sufficient for a straightforward list operation. It lacks only explicit usage differentiation and some behavioral details, but these are not critical for a simple per-material listing tool.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description compensates by explicitly explaining that material_id is 'the ID of the material blueprint,' which adds semantic meaning beyond the raw integer type. However, it does not explain how to obtain that ID.

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 states 'List all physical spools for a given material blueprint,' which clearly identifies the verb (list), resource (physical spools), and scope (per material blueprint). It implicitly differentiates from the more generic sibling list_spools by being material-scoped, though it does not explicitly name the alternative.

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 phrase 'for a given material blueprint' establishes the clear context for when to use the tool. There is no explicit 'when not to use' or mention of alternatives, but the material-scoped wording sufficiently implies the intended usage.

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