kit_get

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

No annotations exist, so the description must convey behavior. It states 'No authentication required,' which is helpful, but does not mention that the operation is read-only, has no side effects, or any potential errors. More transparency about safety and limitations would improve the score.

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 concise sentences that front-load the action and resource. Every word adds value, with no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains the return content. It covers the single required parameter and explicit return fields. Minor omission: it does not mention error handling or what happens if the kit does not exist, but for a simple GET tool this is sufficient.

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 input schema has one parameter with a clear description, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by explaining what the tool returns (lamatic.config.ts, README, flows), which helps the agent understand the parameter's purpose beyond the schema.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('single kit'), and the specific details returned (lamatic.config.ts, README, list of flows). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'kit_get_flow' (which gets a single flow) and 'kit_list' (list of kits).

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 usage for obtaining full details of a kit, but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'kit_search' or 'kit_list'. No when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria are provided.

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