Get Playbook

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states it 'fetches' data, implying read-only, but does not explicitly declare no side effects, permissions, or other behavioral traits. For a simple read tool, this is adequate but not thorough.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The first defines the purpose, the second provides a usage guideline. Front-loads critical information.

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 a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns (step list and connector requirements). It could mention the return format or confirm it's a single object, but it is largely 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?

Schema coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'playbook_id'. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, which already describes it as 'Playbook UUID or slug.'

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 'fetch', the resource 'a single playbook', and what it includes ('full ordered step list and connector requirements'). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_playbooks (which fetches multiple) and get_playbook_run (a run, not the definition).

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 explicitly says 'Use before running to inspect what the playbook will do and which connectors it needs.' This provides clear context for when to use the tool. It does not name specific alternatives, but the context implies run_playbook for execution.

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