get_parameter

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. 'Get' implies a safe read operation, and the description lists the data returned (value, type, expression, metadata), which is useful. However, it doesn't disclose error conditions, whether the parameter must exist, or side effects. It's sufficient for a simple getter but lacks behavioral depth.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word contributes to understanding what the tool does, with no filler or repetition.

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 tool is simple with 2 parameters and no output schema, but the description omits the return format or structure of 'metadata'. It also lacks guidance on prerequisites (e.g., node must exist). While it provides the primary purpose, it leaves gaps in what an agent should expect in the response, making it minimally viable but not complete.

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%, so the description must compensate for explaining node_path and parm_name. It does not explicitly describe what these parameters mean or how they are used, relying on the parameter names alone. With 0% coverage, the description should provide at least basic semantics, resulting in a low score.

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 single parameter's value, type, expression, and metadata, which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_expression (expression only) and get_parameter_schema (schema only) by covering all four aspects.

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 implies this tool is for when you need comprehensive information about a single parameter. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context suggests it's the go-to for full parameter details. No explicit 'when not to use' is stated, so it falls short of a 5.

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