get_code_example

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It implies a read-only retrieval operation by describing the tool as providing code examples, but does not explicitly state no side effects, rate limits, or authentication requirements. Adequate but not exemplary.

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 that is front-loaded with the core action and efficiently lists included categories. No wasted words, though the list could be more structured. Very concise for the information conveyed.

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 tool has two parameters (well-described in schema) and no output schema, the description adequately covers the scope of examples. It does not discuss error handling or return format but the implied return (code snippets) is clear. Sufficient for an agent.

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 100% with both parameters described, so baseline is 3. The description adds marginal context (e.g., types of examples) but does not significantly enhance understanding beyond what the schema already provides.

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 the tool provides 'ready-to-use code examples for BigCommerce API operations' and lists specific categories (REST, GraphQL, webhooks, OAuth, etc.), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_api_endpoints (endpoint details) or get_auth_guide (auth only).

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 lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the purpose is clear, it does not state 'use this for code snippets, use get_api_endpoints for endpoint details,' leaving the agent to infer from sibling names.

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