get_element_by_id

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get full details' but does not explain what those details include, whether the tool is read-only, what happens if the element is not found, or any rate/limit considerations. For a read operation this is minimal, but it adds no context beyond the verb itself.

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, front-loaded sentence with no fluff. It states the core purpose efficiently. However, it is slightly under-specified for a two-parameter tool, leaving the model_id undefined. It earns a 4 because it is concise and clear, but not a 5 because it lacks a second clarifying sentence.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin to fully orient an agent. It doesn't describe the response format or scope of 'full details', nor does it clarify the distinction between GlobalId and other identifiers (as in 'get_element_by_label'). The agent may need to infer important details from the name or schema alone.

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% and the description must compensate. It mentions 'GlobalId' but completely omits 'model_id', which is a required parameter. The agent receives no help understanding what model_id refers to or how it relates to the GlobalId. The description adds minimal value for one of two parameters.

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 identifies the resource ('a single element') and scope ('by its GlobalId'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_elements_by_type' (plural) and 'get_element_by_label' (different identifier), so an agent can correctly select this tool when a GlobalId is available.

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 when to use the tool (when you have a GlobalId for a single element) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like 'get_element_by_label' or 'search_elements'. The usage context is clear but not fully articulated with exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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