vremly_describe_endpoint

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a critical, non-obvious server behavior (silent stripping of unknown fields) and mentions that a credential is accepted, though it doesn't detail authentication requirements. It does not contradict any annotations (none exist). The description goes beyond a simple definition by explaining the consequence of misuse.

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 with zero waste. The primary purpose is front-loaded, followed by a high-value usage warning. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must explain what is returned. It explicitly lists the components (path/query parameters, request body schema with required fields, response schemas, and credential). It also covers when to use it relative to siblings. Given the tool's moderate complexity (2 parameters, no nested objects), the description is complete enough for an agent to call it correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both parameters ('path' and 'method') are already documented with formats and examples. The description adds no additional semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate. It does reinforce that the path must be a template as returned by search, but that is already in the schema description.

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 states a clear verb ('Describe') with a specific resource ('one Vremly endpoint') and enumerates the exact content (parameters, body schema, responses, credential). It distinguishes itself from siblings: it is not a search tool (vremly_search_endpoints) nor a request tool (vremly_request).

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?

Explicitly instructs when to call this tool ('Call this before vremly_request') and explains why (server validation strips unknown fields silently, so a misspelled key fails invisibly). This provides both a positive trigger and a warning that motivates its use, without needing to infer.

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