nt_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the tool's connection-dependent behavior (returns value when connected, error when disconnected) and defines the response structure. However, it does not mention potential side effects, timeout behavior, or whether the topic must exist.

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 two sentences: the first states the core function, the second provides the response format. It is front-loaded, efficient, and contains no fluff.

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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no nested objects) and the provided response format, the description covers the essential purpose, connection state behavior, and output structure. It is missing usage guidelines and parameter details, but as a read-only simple getter, it is reasonably complete.

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 'topic' string parameter with no descriptions (0% coverage). The description adds minimal meaning beyond 'the value of topic,' lacking details on valid topic formats, path syntax, or examples. It does not sufficiently compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 tool returns the JSON-normalized value of a topic, using a specific verb ('Return') and a clear resource. It is distinct from siblings like nt_get_multiple by focusing on a single topic, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with them.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like nt_get_multiple or nt_subscribe. It also does not mention prerequisites such as requiring an active connection, beyond the implicit connected/disconnected response states.

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