model_get_macros

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It communicates a read-only listing operation and clarifies that the result is names, not macro contents. However, it does not address edge behavior such as invalid model paths, ordering, empty results, or whether only direct child macros are included.

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?

A single sentence with no filler. The operation, scope, and output kind are front-loaded, and every word contributes to the meaning.

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?

Adequate for a simple getter: it states the input scope and that the output is Macro names. It remains incomplete because there is no output schema and no detail about return type, empty results, or direct versus recursive enumeration, and no annotations cover safety semantics.

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 indicates that the single parameter model_path refers to the Model under which macros are listed, but it does not explain the expected path format or whether a full object path is required.

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?

States a precise operation: enumerate all Macro names belonging to a Model. The resource and scope ('Macro names under a Model') distinguish it from sibling macro content/execution tools and other model_* getters, so an agent can identify the right tool without opening schemas.

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?

Provides no guidance about when to choose this tool over alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or sibling tools such as model_get_mvars, model_get_mpars, or macro_get_text, so the agent must infer usage purely from the tool name and minimal description.

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