macro_get_text

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. The verb 'Get' suggests a read-only operation, but the description does not state behavior on missing macros, whether the return value is a string, or whether any side effects occur. This is a minimal behavioral disclosure.

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 and front-loaded, but it is too sparse to be considered well-structured. Every word earns its place, yet the single sentence provides no additional context that would help an agent use the tool correctly.

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 getter with one parameter and no output schema, the description should at least clarify the path format and the return value. The absence of any behavioral or path context leaves the tool inadequately specified, though the core action is not misleading.

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 only parameter, macro_path, has 0% schema description coverage and the tool description does not explain its format, accepted path syntax, or whether it is relative to a model/project. An agent has no way to know how to construct a valid macro_path value.

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 states a specific action ('Get') and resource ('text content of a Macro'), so an agent knows what the tool returns. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling getters like object_get_val or macro_set_text, but the pairing with macro_set_text makes the purpose reasonably clear.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool instead of alternatives, such as macro_execute or macro_set_text. The intended use is implied at best: retrieving macro text before editing or inspection. No exclusions or contextual triggers are provided.

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