Api risk matrices probability retrieve

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

The description claims the endpoint allows risk matrices 'to be viewed or edited', but annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The 'edited' claim directly contradicts the declared read-only behavior, and no other behavioral context (e.g., that this returns the probability scale used by a matrix) is supplied.

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 short sentence is appropriately sized, but it is entirely filler boilerplate that conveys no tool-specific information. Brevity here reflects under-specification rather than disciplined editing.

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?

With no output schema and no parameters, the description is the only source of behavioral information, yet it says nothing about what a 'probability' resource contains (levels, labels, ordering) or how it relates to a matrix instance. For an endpoint in a dense risk-matrix family, this leaves the agent unable to call it confidently.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters and the schema has additionalProperties=false, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline 4 applies for a parameterless endpoint.

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 is generic Django-REST boilerplate that restates the title rather than the resource: it says 'risk matrices to be viewed or edited' without ever mentioning 'probability', which is the only thing distinguishing this endpoint from dozens of sibling risk-matrix tools. An agent cannot tell from this text what the endpoint returns (a probability scale/levels) or why it exists separately from risk_matrices_impact_retrieve or risk_matrices_retrieve.

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 indication of when to use this endpoint versus the many siblings (risk_matrices_retrieve, risk_matrices_impact_retrieve, risk_matrices_risk_retrieve, risk_matrices_colors_retrieve). The phrase 'viewed or edited' actively misdirects rather than scoping usage.

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