get_glossary_terms

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions return type but does not disclose behavioral traits such as pagination behavior, sorting, or whether it is read-only. The defaults for limit and offset are only in the schema.

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 concise, with one sentence for purpose, one for returns, and a structured argument list. It is front-loaded with the action. Could be slightly more structured, but it is efficient.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown), the description need not detail return values. It covers parameters well and mentions key return components. Missing context about ordering or limits, but overall adequate for a listing tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by providing clear explanations for all three parameters: glossary_guid (GUID of the glossary), limit (max terms), and offset (pagination offset). This adds significant meaning 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 action 'List terms in a specific glossary' and specifies the return content (business terms with definitions, linked entities, category assignments). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_glossary_term' (single term) and 'list_glossaries' (lists glossaries).

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 provides clear context for when to use (to list terms in a specific glossary) and implies the prerequisite of having a glossary GUID. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, though sibling tool names provide some differentiation.

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