property_get_all

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly signals a non-mutating read operation via 'Read', and 'accessible' implies permission-aware filtering of results. It does not discuss failure modes or return format, but for a simple getter this is reasonably 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?

The description is a single, focused sentence with no filler. The verb is front-loaded, the resource is identified, and the scope is stated immediately, making it easy to scan and act on.

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 one-parameter read tool, the description is mostly sufficient: the schema covers target and the description states the result scope. However, 'common' is left undefined, and with no output schema or annotations, a little more context about what a caller should expect in the response would improve completeness.

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 input schema already provides full documentation of the single parameter (target: 'Full path or UUID of the Instance'), and the description adds no additional parameter-level meaning. This matches the baseline for high schema description coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Read'), a clear resource ('an Instance'), and a precise scope ('all common and accessible properties'). The word 'all' establishes a contrast with property_get, and the properties/attributes distinction separates it from attribute_get_all, so an agent can confidently identify the intended operation.

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?

Usage context is only implied through 'all common and accessible properties'; the agent can infer this tool is for retrieving a full property snapshot rather than a single property, but the description does not explicitly state when to choose it over property_get, attribute_get_all, or other inspection tools.

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