get_element_params

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It states 'Read' implying no mutation, but omits details on error handling (e.g., invalid svg_path or ids), return format, or any side effects. Basic operation is implied but not fully transparent.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the core functionality, but could benefit from a bit more detail on parameters without becoming overly verbose.

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 no output schema, the description should hint at return values. It does not describe the structure or content of the parameters returned. With 0% schema coverage and no output schema, the description leaves significant gaps for the agent.

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 coverage is 0%, so description should clarify parameter semantics. It explains the 'ids' parameter's dual behavior (all vs specific), but does not describe 'svg_path' at all, leaving its purpose and format unclear.

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 tool reads Ink/Stitch parameters from SVG elements, with a specific verb 'Read' and resource 'SVG elements'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like set_element_params (write) and list_known_params (lists all known parameters, not per element).

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?

The description mentions filtering by ids, but gives no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like list_elements or list_known_params. No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use advice.

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