Spss Get Method Support

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the return content categories and 'Get' implies a read-only, side-effect-free lookup, which is useful. It does not state any auth requirements, error behavior on unknown method names, or whether an unknown tool_name returns empty vs. an error.

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?

A single efficient sentence with the verb and scope front-loaded and no filler. Slightly dense in its list of returned categories, but every clause carries information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. For a simple single-param lookup this is close to adequate, but the lone parameter is undocumented in both schema and description, and there is no sibling routing 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?

One required parameter (tool_name) with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never explains it. The phrase 'registry-backed SPSS method' implies tool_name is a registered method identifier, but format, allowed values, and how to discover valid names are left undocumented.

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 and resource ('Get support metadata for a registry-backed SPSS method') and enumerates the metadata categories returned (command family, support tier, coverage assertions, documentation tags). It is distinguishable from siblings like spss_get_method_schema and spss_list_supported_methods, though the boundary is implied rather than stated.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus spss_list_supported_methods, spss_get_method_schema, or spss_read_metadata. There are no prerequisites or exclusion conditions, leaving the agent to guess from the name alone.

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