mmar_get_role_to_for_relationclass_instance

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read operation ('Get') but does not elaborate on return details, error handling, authentication requirements, or any side effects. For a simple getter, the basic action is clear, but additional context is lacking.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that is immediately understandable. It contains no fluff or redundancy and earns its place by clearly identifying the exact resource and scope.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description adequately explains what is retrieved (the destination role instance). It could mention behavior when the relationclass instance or role instance does not exist, but for a basic getter, the information provided is sufficient. The sibling distinction via 'to' helps contextualize its place among related tools.

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 description covers 100% of the parameter's meaning ('The UUID of the RelationclassInstance'). The description adds no extra semantic value beyond restating 'a specific relationclass instance', so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Get') and the specific resource ('the destination (to) role instance of a specific relationclass instance'). It explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool by including '(to)' versus the corresponding 'from' tool.

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 implies when to use this tool: when you need the destination role instance of a relationclass instance. While it doesn't explicitly name the sibling tool or state exclusions, the 'to' qualifier provides clear context for selecting this over the 'from' variant. No additional alternatives or when-not-to-use guidance is given.

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