get_armature_info

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the safety profile, and the description is consistent with it by calling the operation 'info'. However, the description adds no further behavioral context such as error conditions, permissions, or scope limits, so it only meets the baseline with annotation support.

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 compact sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose and key outputs. It is front-loaded and contains no filler or redundant phrasing.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is incomplete for correct invocation because it fails to define the 'object' parameter. With one required parameter and zero schema documentation, an agent lacks essential information about what value to supply.

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 single 'object' parameter is undocumented. The description implies the target should be an armature, but it does not explain what format to use (name, path, ID, etc.), so the agent cannot reliably construct the argument.

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 states a clear verb and resource ('Get armature info') and specifies concrete fields: bone hierarchy and bone count. This differentiates it from siblings like get_bone_info and get_object_info, so an agent can tell when to use it.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_bone_info or get_object_info. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or context clues beyond the basic purpose, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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