get_prims

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions pagination but does not explain how node_path is used, what data is returned, whether there are side effects, or what the response format looks like. This is a significant gap for a read operation.

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 fluff, but it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise. It lacks substance needed for a 4-parameter tool, making it too sparse to count as effective front-loading.

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 the tool's complexity (4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is grossly incomplete. It fails to define the key terms (primitive data, node_path, attribs) and does not explain pagination mechanics or return values, making it impossible to invoke correctly without external knowledge.

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. 'Pagination' weakly hints at start and count, but the required parameter node_path and the attribs parameter are completely unexplained. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema names.

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 states a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('primitive data'), with 'pagination' indicating a list-style retrieval. This reasonably distinguishes it from siblings like get_geo_summary or get_prim_intrinsics, though it could specify exactly what aspect of primitives is returned.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_points or get_prim_intrinsics. The pagination hint is the only contextual clue, but there is no explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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