get_parameter_schema

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the output content (names, labels, types, tuple sizes, current values, defaults, numeric ranges, menu options), filtering behavior, and pagination. It doesn't mention potential side effects or failure modes, but as a read-only discovery tool, this is adequately transparent.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage and filtering/pagination details. Every sentence earns its place 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?

Given the absence of annotations and output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, output fields, filtering, and pagination. It doesn't describe return format or error handling, but for this tool's complexity, the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains pattern matching semantics (glob against name and label) and pagination via offset/limit. Path is implied as the node to describe, though not explicitly tied to the 'path' parameter. Overall, it adds meaningful parameter context beyond the raw schema.

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: to describe a node's parameters with a specific list of details (names, labels, types, etc.). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_parameter and set_parameters by explicitly positioning this as a discovery tool before calling set_parameters.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: 'Use this to discover valid parameter names/values before calling set_parameters.' Also explains filtering with glob patterns and pagination with offset/limit. It doesn't explicitly compare to alternatives like get_parameter, but the usage context is clear.

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