native_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavior. It describes a read-only query that returns specified info; no side effects are implied. This is sufficient but minimal—could mention that it is safe to call repeatedly. No contradictions with annotations (none exist).

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 sentence listing exactly what the tool returns, with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, 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?

Given that an output schema exists, the description needn't detail return structure. It lists the high-level components (params, return type, etc.). However, it omits that the tool requires a valid native name and that it is a read-only operation. Still, it is largely complete for its purpose.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage for the single parameter 'name'. The description compensates by stating what the tool gets ('Get a native's...'), implying that 'name' is the native's name. This adds essential meaning beyond the schema, though it does not specify format or validity criteria.

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 clearly enumerates the resource: 'a native's params (order + types), return type, namespace, flags, and doc comment'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'call_native' (which executes) and 'search_natives' (which finds by pattern), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 implicitly tells when to use: when you need detailed information about a specific native before calling it. However, it does not explicitly exclude cases or mention alternatives like 'search_natives' for discovery. The context is clear enough for an informational tool, but lacks explicit guidance.

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