ivar_get

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

The word 'get' and the mention of returning a 'value' signal a non-mutating read operation, which is the primary behavioral trait an agent needs. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the description does not disclose behavior for missing variables, error conditions, or the exact representation of the returned value.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to the action, resource, and scope, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 one-parameter getter, the description covers the core purpose and scope sufficiently. But the lack of annotations, output schema, and any sibling-routing context leaves minor but real gaps around edge-case behavior and how this tool relates to the numerous other getter tools.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds contextual meaning beyond the bare 'Variable name' schema entry by clarifying that var_name must identify a system variable (IVar) at Main level, which helps the agent select an appropriate input.

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 a get operation on a specific resource type (system variable/IVar) and identifies the location (Main level). It does not explicitly distinguish IVar from the many sibling variable getters like svar_get or mvar_get, but the 'system variable (IVar)' terminology provides enough specificity.

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 given about when to use this tool instead of alternative sibling getters such as svar_get, mvar_get, dvar_get, or instrvar_get. The 'at Main level' scope implies a condition, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance.

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