pixera_get_param

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and 'Read' does disclose a safe, non-mutating operation. The path example adds useful behavioral context, but there is no mention of error behavior for invalid paths, case sensitivity, or lookup semantics.

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 front-loaded sentence with the key action first and the clarifying example immediately after. No waste, though it is terse enough to leave gaps.

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 return values need not be explained. For a single-param read tool the description is adequate, but with no annotations and no error/behavior notes it is only minimally 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 coverage is 0% (only a bare 'Path' title), so the description must compensate, and it does by supplying a concrete dot-delimited example ('Timeline 1.Layer 1.Opacity'). That example conveys the hierarchical path format the schema omits, though it doesn't cover edge cases.

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 (read) and resource (parameter value) with scoping (by instance path), and the example path clarifies exactly what is addressed. It does not name a sibling to distinguish from, but the verb+resource combination is unambiguous against alternatives like get_layer_json or get_timeline_time.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as pixera_call or pixera_get_layer_json. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name and description.

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