xdr_get_filters

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering safety and data scope. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context—such as response format, pagination, or whether the result set is dynamic. With annotations present, the bar is lower, but the description still contributes nothing beyond the bare function name.

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, efficient sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the core action. While terse, it avoids unnecessary words and is appropriately concise for a simple getter.

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?

The description lacks context about what 'filter options' entail, how the output is structured, or when to use this tool in a workflow. With no output schema and only a single parameter, the description should explain more about the tool's role, but it stays minimal. This is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's purpose in a broader context.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the parameter `section` is fully documented in the schema with an enum list. The description itself adds no extra meaning about the parameter or how to select a value. Baseline 3 applies because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 a specific action (get) and resource (available filter options) tied to an XDR section. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like xdr_search or xdr_count, the purpose is unambiguous and distinct enough for an agent to infer the intended function.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when filter options are needed, how they relate to search or count operations, or any exclusions. The description leaves usage entirely implicit.

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