get_smart_object_slots_detail

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine value by disclosing the full return structure, which is otherwise undocumented since there is no output schema. No permission or error context is given, but the safety-relevant burden is already lifted.

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 purpose sentence is front-loaded and wastes nothing, and the Returns block is a structured, scannable enumeration rather than prose. The return type is verbose but earns its place given there is no output schema.

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 single-parameter read tool with full annotation coverage, the description supplies both the purpose and the complete return shape, so an agent can call it and interpret the result. The only meaningful gap is the absence of when-to-use guidance relative to sibling smart-object readers.

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% and there is a single parameter (definition_path) already documented as the path to the USmartObjectDefinition asset. The description adds no syntax or format guidance beyond what the schema provides, 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?

States a specific verb (read back) and resource (per-slot detail of a USmartObjectDefinition) and even enumerates the fields returned, so the agent knows exactly what it gets. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like get_smart_object_info or get_smart_object_definition_summary, which keeps it from a 5.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_smart_object_definition_summary or get_smart_object_info. Usage is only implied by the phrase 'per-slot detail', leaving the agent to infer the selection condition.

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