get-criteria-by-level

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states a read operation ('get') but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether results are sorted, paginated, or limited. Adequate but minimal for a simple query tool.

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?

Single sentence of 21 words, front-loaded with key action and scope. No superfluous content; every word earns its place.

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?

The description does not explain the return format or whether results include criteria from both parts when part is omitted. Given no output schema, more detail about the response would be helpful for completeness.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds 'Optionally filter by part' which slightly clarifies usage but is mostly redundant with the schema's enum descriptions and required field specification.

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 verb 'get', the resource 'ATAG 2.0 success criteria', and distinguishes by conformance level with optional part filter. It is specific and differentiates from sibling tools like 'get-criterion' and 'list-success-criteria'.

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 fetching criteria by level but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list-success-criteria' or 'get-criterion'. No exclusions or when-not-to-use are mentioned.

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