getContentBlocks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Retrieve' implies a read operation, but it does not explicitly state that it is read-only, safe, or whether it requires a specific project to be set. It also does not disclose the effect of the includeContent parameter on the response, which is a significant behavioral detail.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and object. It is concise with no wasted words.

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?

For a simple retrieval tool with 2 optional parameters and no output schema, the description is partially complete. It clearly states what is returned, but it does not clarify what 'current project' means (e.g., whether a project must be set beforehand), and it omits any mention of filtering behavior or pagination. The schema fills in parameter details, but the ambiguity around project context is a gap.

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 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds a small amount of context by mentioning 'IDs and field data', which loosely relates to the includeContent parameter, but it does not meaningfully enhance the schema descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'all content blocks from the current project', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like updateContentBlock. It also mentions the type of data returned (IDs and field data), which adds clarity.

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 when content blocks are needed, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. There is no mention of exclusions or that updateContentBlock should be used for modifications, so the guidance is only implied.

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