get_sdk_pattern

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it returns working code examples, which is useful. However, it doesn't specify if the patterns are versioned, if authentication is required, rate limits, or the format of the examples (e.g., snippets vs full files). No output schema exists, so more detail on return structure would help. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and immediately followed by return detail. No waste, every sentence earns its place.

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 a simple tool with one required parameter, high schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is minimally complete. It states what the tool does and what it returns, but lacks usage context, behavioral details, or differentiation from other guide tools. Adequate but not rich.

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%, and the single parameter (operation) is fully documented with an enum. The description adds no further parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is correct when 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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (TypeScript code patterns for GDEX SDK operations) with a clear scope. Distinguished from sibling tools like search_gdex_docs by focusing on code patterns rather than documentation. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other guide tools (e.g., get_trading_guide) beyond the 'code patterns' angle.

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?

Implies usage for retrieving code examples when implementing SDK operations, but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No alternatives named (e.g., search_gdex_docs for general docs). An agent must infer appropriate use from the tool name and description alone.

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