get_tilemap_info

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

With no annotations, the description fully bears the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get info' which implies a read operation, but nothing about possible errors, what node_path must refer to, or what the response contains. The behavior is under-specified.

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 short sentence with no redundancy, which is efficient. However, it is under-specified, omitting essential details, so the brevity is not a strength in this case.

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 there is no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what 'info' means and set expectations for the return value. It does not do so, leaving the tool's functionality incomplete 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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description does not mention the 'node_path' parameter, its format, or its role. The parameter name is somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds no meaning beyond the schema, failing to compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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 the tool gets 'info about a TileMapLayer', using a specific verb and resource. However, 'info' is vague and no specifics are given about what kind of info, making it less clear than it could be. It does distinguish from sibling tilemap mutation tools, but lacks the detail to fully clarify its purpose.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The description simply states what it does, so the agent receives no help in selecting it appropriately.

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