get_style

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

The description indicates a read operation without side effects, and notes case-insensitivity. However, it lacks details on error handling (e.g., if style not found) and does not explicitly confirm that no modifications occur, which is partially mitigated by the verb 'Get'.

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 extremely concise, with a single line for the main action followed by structured Args and Returns sections. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and each part is informative without 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?

For a simple lookup tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is largely complete. It explains input semantics and expected output shape. A minor gap is the lack of error behavior documentation, but overall it suffices.

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 description adds significant meaning beyond the schema: it clarifies that the parameter accepts either a style name or styleId, and specifies case-insensitivity. The schema only provides the name and type, so this is valuable context.

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 'Get details of a single style by name or styleId (case-insensitive).' It uses a specific verb (Get) and resource (style), and differentiates from the sibling tool 'get_styles' by specifying 'single style'.

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 (looking up a style by name or ID) and mentions case-insensitivity, but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives like 'get_styles' for listing all styles.

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