cl_lve_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only names the data. It does not explicitly state that this is a read-only retrieval or what happens for an invalid/nonexistent username.

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 compact lines with no filler, and the core purpose is stated first. The Args block is minimal and directly supplements the schema.

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 one-parameter getter with an output schema, the description covers the essential resource, scope, and parameter meaning. It lacks explicit routing to sibling tools, but nothing required to invoke the call correctly is missing.

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 schema provides no description for username, and the description adds 'DirectAdmin account,' which clarifies the identifier's domain. It still omits format, case sensitivity, or whether the account must already exist.

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 identifies a concrete resource, LVE limits, and scopes it to a single user, which distinguishes it from plural/list operations like cl_lve_users. It lacks an explicit verb such as 'retrieves' or 'returns', but the resource and scope are unambiguous.

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?

'For one user' provides implicit guidance that this is a per-account lookup rather than a list-all operation. However, it never names cl_lve_users or cl_lve_set as alternatives, so when to choose this tool over those siblings is left to inference.

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