GetAdtTypes

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

The description marks the tool as [read-only], indicating no side effects. It mentions retrieval and validation but does not describe the return format, authentication needs, or rate limits. With no annotations, more detail on behavior would be helpful.

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?

Single sentence with no wasted words. Front-loads '[read-only]' to immediately convey safety. Information is presented clearly and efficiently.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description partially covers behavior (list/validate) but omits what the tool returns (e.g., a list of strings or a boolean for validation). It is adequate for a simple lookup but incomplete for full agent guidance.

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?

The only parameter 'validate_type' has a schema description of 'Type name to validate (optional)'. The description adds context by linking the parameter to the validation function, clarifying its role beyond the 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 retrieves all valid ADT object types and can validate a specific type name. The verb 'retrieve' and resource 'all valid ADT object types' are specific. It distinguishes from sibling Get* tools that retrieve specific objects, not type lists.

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 implies usage for getting type names or validating them, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like GetObjectInfo or GetTypeInfo. No guidance on when not to use or prerequisites.

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