get_mass_config_traits

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

No annotations are provided, but the description clearly indicates this is a read operation ('Read all traits') and describes what is returned. It does not mention any side effects or permissions, but as a read tool, the behavioral disclosure is adequate.

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 concise and well-structured: main action first, contrast with sibling tool second, then parameter description, then return value summary. No unnecessary words.

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 the presence of an output schema, the description briefly lists the return fields, which is sufficient. The tool is simple with one parameter, and the description covers all necessary aspects.

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 single parameter 'asset_path' is thoroughly described with an example path. The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description fully compensates by specifying the exact type and format.

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 clearly states it reads all traits from a Mass Entity Config asset with expanded properties. It explicitly distinguishes itself from get_data_asset_properties, which only shows trait object paths.

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 provides an explicit alternative (get_data_asset_properties) and explains when to use this tool instead: when you need expanded editable properties with current values.

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