Charts: get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful observability context by enumerating exactly which configuration fields are returned and noting the payload is JSON, which goes beyond the annotations.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then the returned fields, then routing guidance. No filler; every clause carries information.

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?

For a single-param read tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description compensates by listing the return contents and stating the format. Nothing an agent needs to call and interpret it is missing.

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% and the single `id` param is documented in the schema with a pointer to `charts_list`. The description adds no syntax, format, or constraint detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get a chart's full configuration') and enumerates the concrete settings returned (type, data source, entity/metric, grouping, measure/aggregation, filters, time window, target, comparison). It distinguishes itself from `charts_update` and `dashboards_widget_preview`, so an agent can route correctly without opening schemas.

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?

Explicitly says when to use it ('Read it before `charts_update`') and names the alternative for a different need ('to see the data it draws, use `dashboards_widget_preview` with type chart and its id'). Both the when and the alternative are stated outright.

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