property_get

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It states 'Read' to signal a read-only operation and discloses the return behavior: a normalized representation with data type information. It does not cover error or edge cases, but for a simple property read, this is solid.

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?

One sentence states the operation, the target resource, and the return format without any filler. The most important information is front-loaded and every word contributes.

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-parameter read tool, the description covers the operation and the return shape. The absence of an output schema means the phrase 'normalized representation with data type info' is a bit vague, but it is enough for an agent to understand the tool's purpose and expected result.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both target and property, including property examples. The description adds the notion of a 'normalized representation' but gives no parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 names a specific verb and resource: 'Read the value of a specific property on an Instance.' It clearly distinguishes this from property_set (write) and property_get_all (reads all properties), and it is not muddled with attribute_get or other siblings.

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 context is clear: use this when you need one property's value on an Instance. It does not explicitly name alternatives like property_get_all or attribute_get, but the 'specific property' wording implies the singular-read use case, which is sufficient for a simple getter.

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