get_data

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

With no annotations, the description provides useful behavioral details: caching durations (24h reference, 5min transactional) and JSON return format with data lineage metadata. However, it lacks disclosure on authentication requirements or potential side effects, though 'get_data' implies read-only.

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?

Three sentences effectively cover purpose, filters, and caching/return format. No redundant text, front-loaded with core function.

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 complexity (many parameters, nested object, no output schema) and lack of annotations, the description misses details on constructing the filters object and the required api_key parameter. Caching info is helpful, but pagination and auth are left unclear.

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 67%, and the schema already documents many parameters well. The description adds a general statement about supported filters but no specific parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score 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 tool retrieves filtered records from a CMS dataset, with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'run_query' by emphasizing filtering capabilities and listing filter types.

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 usage for filtered data retrieval but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'run_query' or 'get_schema'. No 'when not to use' or sibling differentiation.

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