describe_block

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

The readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false annotations already declare this is a safe, local read, so the description needn't repeat that. It adds value by specifying the shape of the returned schema information, but says nothing about error behavior for an unknown block name or whether all parameters are always described.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the return contents are enumerated compactly after the colon. Nothing is wasted and the key information arrives first.

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?

The presence of an output schema means return values need not be explained, so the description is not obligated to describe them. However, for a one-argument tool whose only argument is undocumented, the definition leaves a real gap around identifying the block and around positioning this against get_block.

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 0% and the single parameter "block" has no description at all, so the description must compensate and does not. It never clarifies whether "block" is a block ID, a slot index, a model name, or a display name — the one thing most likely to cause a failed call.

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 ("Read a block's parameter schema") and even enumerates the payload returned (types, display ranges, options), so the agent knows this retrieves metadata rather than values. It does not differentiate itself from the sibling get_block, which an agent could reasonably confuse it with.

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 explicit statement of when to use this versus get_block or list_blocks, nor any mention of it being a prerequisite to set_block_params. The usage (inspect the schema before writing parameters) is only implied by the word "schema," so the agent must infer the workflow.

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