svar_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Get a Setup variable value' clearly indicates a read operation with no destructive implications, but it does not describe return format, error behavior, or whether the value is scalar, string, or structured.

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, focused sentence with no filler or redundant information. Every word contributes to identifying the tool's purpose.

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 one-parameter getter, the description is minimally adequate: the required parameter is fully covered by the schema and the return concept ('value') is implied. However, with no output schema or annotations, it would benefit from clarifying what kind of value is returned and how paths are formatted.

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 100%, so the schema already documents var_path as 'Full path'. The description does not add meaningful parameter semantics beyond reinforcing that the path refers to a setup variable, which matches the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and identifies a clear resource ('Setup variable value'), making it obvious this is a retrieval tool for setup variables. It is distinct from svar_create and svar_set in intent, though it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives.

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 the tool is for retrieving setup variable values but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose it over similar getters/listers like setup_get_svars, object_get_val, or tablevar_get. No prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative routing are mentioned.

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