Get Functional Objectives

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden and does state 'Read-only; no side effects,' which is the key safety signal. It also discloses what the single-object fetch returns (capability, condition, Given-When-Then, test state), though it says nothing about auth requirements or pagination on the list path.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and the read-only note, then a bulleted enumeration of the id-selection behavior. The definition sentence for 'functional objective' earns its place, but the prose is slightly longer than strictly needed.

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 read tool with an output schema, the description needn't explain return values, and it covers the list-vs-fetch duality plus the sibling alternative. The only omissions are auth/pagination behavior and any treatment of server_version.

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 67%, and the description adds real meaning beyond the schema by spelling out the empty-string/omitted sentinel behavior and where the id comes from ('from a prior list call'). model_id is only implicitly covered, and server_version is never discussed.

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 and resource ('List a model's functional objectives, or fetch one by id') and explicitly defines what a functional objective is, which lets an agent distinguish it from generic objective tools. It also names the sibling get_functional_coverage and the exact condition that routes there.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use branching: omitted/empty id -> list the full test plan, an id -> fetch one objective's detail. It also names the alternative tool (get_functional_coverage) and the parameter (gaps_only=True) that selects it.

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