get_sdk_pattern

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety and locality are covered. The description adds one useful behavioral fact beyond that — it returns executable code rather than prose — but says nothing about output shape (snippet vs. full file, imports included, TypeScript version) or whether results are cached/static.

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, the purpose front-loaded before the return-value note, with no filler. It is efficient, though the second sentence is close to restating the first's implication.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations covering return format, the description should carry that burden. It says 'working code examples' but not what those examples contain or how they relate to the sibling guide tools, so an agent knows what it will get only in outline.

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 'operation' parameter is a fully enumerated 12-value list, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds nothing about the parameter — it does not clarify that the enum value selects which pattern family is returned.

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 names a concrete verb and resource: retrieve TypeScript code patterns for GDEX SDK operations, plus the return artifact (working code examples). It is clear on its own, but it never distinguishes itself from doc-shaped siblings such as search_gdex_docs, get_component_guide, or get_skill_file, leaving the agent to guess which reference source to reach for.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no named alternative. In a sibling set containing at least four other documentation/guide tools, the absence of any routing rule is a real gap.

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