get_element

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses 'Returns a fresh snapshot with current states, value, supported actions, and description', which gives good behavioral context. It does not mention side effects or auth requirements, but for a read-only inspection tool, this is sufficient.

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 two short paragraphs plus a docstring-style parameter note. Every sentence adds value: purpose, usage guidance, and parameter clarification. It is front-loaded with the main action and efficiently structured.

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?

With one parameter, an existing output schema (context signal), and clear indication of what the return includes (states, value, actions, description), the description is complete for the tool's complexity. An agent can confidently use it without additional clarification.

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 0%, but the description adds 'The element ID (from find/elements results)' for the single parameter, providing context about where the ID originates. This adds value beyond the schema. A 5 would require more specific format or constraints (e.g., UUID pattern).

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 begins with 'Get a single element by its ID with full detail', which uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('single element'), and clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'elements' (plural) and 'find' (returns list). The purpose is unambiguous and well-differentiated.

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 explicitly states 'Use this to inspect an element before calling the action() tool', providing clear when-to-use guidance. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, such as using 'find' for multiple elements, which would earn a 5.

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