shared_lists_get

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

readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false already declare this is a safe read, so the description only contributes the lookup-by-name behavior. It says nothing about error behavior for a missing list, whether the name is case-sensitive, or what a shared list actually is, which for a 0%-coverage schema is a notable gap.

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 four-word sentence with zero padding and the key information front-loaded. It earns its place, though the extreme brevity is under-specification rather than optimal concision.

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?

No output schema, no annotations beyond the read-only flags, and no documentation of the parameter, so the description carries real explanatory burden. Nothing about the return shape, lookup semantics, or relationship to shared_lists_list is provided.

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%, so the description must compensate for the single required parameter, and it only says 'by name'. The schema's slash-permitting pattern suggests hierarchical/path-style names, but the description never explains that semantics, leaving the most error-prone aspect of the call undocumented.

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 ('Get') and resource ('Shared List') with a lookup key ('by name'), so an agent can tell it fetches one list rather than enumerating them like shared_lists_list. It stops short of naming or contrasting with any sibling explicitly, so it's clear but undifferentiated.

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 mention of an alternative such as shared_lists_list for enumeration or shared_lists_update for modification. The 'by name' phrasing implies a targeted single fetch, but usage conditions are left entirely to inference.

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