alterios_get_view

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 only states 'Read' implying idempotency, but lacks details on what 'full view object' includes, permissions required, rate limits, or potential side effects. More context is needed for a safe read operation.

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 concise with a single sentence. However, it is under-specified given the tool's complexity and the number of parameters. Conciseness is valued, but not at the expense of missing critical parameter or usage 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?

Although an output schema exists, the description is incomplete. It does not describe the three parameters or provide context on how to use them. With 0% schema coverage and no parameter descriptions, the tool definition is inadequate for correct agent invocation.

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%, so the description must compensate. It mentions retrieval 'by ID' but fails to specify which parameter (view_id) is the ID or explain the optional profile and project_id parameters. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond the parameter names.

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 ('Read'), the resource ('full Alterios view object'), and the retrieval method ('by ID'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like alterios_list_objects (list vs get) and alterios_view_data (data retrieval vs object metadata).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when to choose get_view over list_objects, view_data, or view_entities, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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