Get one script trace

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/openWorld=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: it names the underlying `trace/get` WebSocket command and warns that the call 'blocks for the WebSocket round trip', which is latency information the annotations do not convey.

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?

Front-loaded with the primary action and purpose, then a compact returns/limits block. Every sentence earns its place; the WebSocket command name is borderline implementation detail but useful for diagnostics, keeping it just short of a 5.

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, yet the description still gives a one-line sense of the return shape ('dict with the full step-by-step trace'). With annotations covering safety and the schema covering params, nothing an agent needs to invoke this correctly is missing.

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 both parameters are already documented in the schema (run_id provenance, script_id prefix format). The description restates that the call takes script_id and run_id but adds no format or edge-case detail beyond the schema, matching the baseline of 3.

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 a full script trace') and immediately enumerates what the trace contains (steps, timing, action results). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like list_script_traces and get_last_script_trace, which it explicitly names.

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?

Contains an explicit 'Not for:' clause routing the agent to `automations_list_script_traces` or `automations_get_last_script_trace` when it does not yet have a run_id. The condition that selects the alternative is stated directly.

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