get_ik_retarget_chain_details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds the returned field set, which is genuine context, but says nothing about failure behavior, auth, or whether a missing chain is reported via the 'found' flag.

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?

Two compact sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and followed by the return shape. No wasted prose, though the inline return block is slightly terse.

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 two-param read-only query with no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the return fields, which is exactly the gap an absent output schema would otherwise leave. Sufficient for correct invocation.

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 100% with only two required params, so the schema documents both fully. The description adds nothing to chain_name or ik_rig_path semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 a specific verb+resource ('Get detailed info about a retarget chain') and enumerates the fields returned, so the agent knows exactly what the tool exposes. It does not explicitly contrast with near siblings like get_ik_retargeter_info or get_ik_rig_info, but the resource is specific enough to stand apart.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternative named among the many get_ik_* siblings. The agent must infer usage purely from the noun.

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