automations_get_script_trace

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden but only lists return fields (steps, timing, action results). No disclosure of side effects, read-only nature, error conditions, pagination, or authentication requirements. The description implies it is a read operation but does not explicitly state behavioral traits.

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?

Single sentence with no redundancy. Could benefit from additional structure (e.g., listing the return fields more explicitly or adding examples), but it is efficient and front-loaded.

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 that the tool has an output schema (so return values are covered) and only two simple parameters, the description is minimal. However, missing usage guidelines and behavioral transparency leave gaps in completeness for an AI agent to use it correctly.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not elaborate on the parameters 'script_id' and 'run_id' beyond their names. It does not explain where to obtain these IDs, their format, or any constraints. The description adds no value beyond the 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 ('Get') and the resource ('full script trace') with specific details (steps, timing, action results) and scope ('for a specific run'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'automations_list_script_traces' by specifying that this retrieves a detailed trace for one run.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'automations_get_automation_trace' or 'automations_list_script_traces'). No prerequisites or context about when it's appropriate to call this function.

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