echopath_get_procedure

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It does disclose the salient return content (replay phrase, parameters, steps), from which a read-only nature can be inferred, but it says nothing about permissions, whether the identifier must be resolvable, or error behavior.

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 short sentences with the purpose front-loaded and no filler. The trailing start_task instruction is slightly tangential to describing this tool, but it is brief and actionable rather than padding.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not detail return values, and it helpfully routes to the follow-up call. However, with two required parameters at 0% coverage and no annotations, the definition leaves the agent guessing about the identifiers it must supply.

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 both 'store' and 'procedure_id' are undocumented in the schema and the description does not compensate. The only mention of 'parameters' refers to the fetched procedure's own parameters, not the two required inputs, leaving their format and origin unspecified.

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 ('Return') and resource ('one stored procedure') and enumerates exactly what comes back: replay phrase, parameters, every step. The scope word 'one' implicitly separates it from the sibling echopath_list_procedures, so an agent can pick it without opening the schema.

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 second sentence gives workflow context ('Start it with echopath_start_task using the replay phrase as the task'), which implies why one would fetch a procedure, but it never states when to choose this tool over echopath_list_procedures or what prerequisites exist. Usage is inferred rather than declared.

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