ddicElement

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds scope context (which element types it covers) but does not detail return format, pagination, or error behavior. This is acceptable given the read-only annotation, but it does not go beyond the basics.

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 sentences with zero waste. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the alternative tool is mentioned concisely. Every word 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?

For a simple read-only tool with fully documented parameters, the description is complete enough. It clarifies scope and points to the right alternative. It could mention return structure, but without an output schema it is not strictly required.

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%, so all four parameters are already well documented. The description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond what the schema provides, which is acceptable per the baseline of 3 when schema carries the load.

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 retrieves a dictionary element (data element, domain, or type) with its properties. It explicitly names the types covered and distinguishes from getStructureSource for tables/structures, so an agent can tell them apart without inspecting schemas.

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?

It provides a clear alternative for a different case (tables/structures should use getStructureSource), which implicitly tells the agent when to use this tool. However, it does not enumerate all other scenarios or exclusions, but the guidance is sufficient for common use.

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