get_module

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says 'Get' and offers no details about error handling (e.g., 404 if not found), required permissions, or whether project_id is mandatory for certain environments. This is a minimal read operation, but the lack of any behavioral caveats leaves the agent under-informed.

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?

One short sentence delivers the core purpose with no redundant words. It is front-loaded and appropriately concise for a simple getter tool.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values are already documented. However, the description lacks usage context (when to pass project_id, behavior on invalid UUID) and sibling differentiation. It is minimally viable but leaves meaningful gaps for an agent to invoke 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 0%. The description clarifies that module_id is the UUID, but the optional project_id parameter is completely unmentioned, leaving its purpose ambiguous. The description adds minimal value over the raw schema and does not compensate for the low 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and names the resource ('single module') plus identifier type ('by UUID'). It clearly distinguishes from list_modules and other get_* tools.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_modules or get_module_by_name (if it existed). The context is implied but not explicit, and there are no exclusions or alternative tool mentions.

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