Get Properties

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and open-world, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds that results are 'persisted' definitions and that filters are optional, but says nothing about result volume, pagination, or whether unpublished/deleted properties are included.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the return content and followed by the use case. The opening 'Get Properties.' merely restates the title and title field, a small redundancy.

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?

All five parameters are optional and fully described in the schema, and annotations carry the safety profile; the description correctly supplies the one thing structured fields cannot, namely why an agent would call this. The only gap is any note about return shape or paging, minor for a small filter-only listing tool.

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 100% and each of the five filters is documented in-schema, including omit-to-include-both semantics for the boolean filters. The description adds nothing about parameter meaning beyond that baseline, which is acceptable when the schema does the work.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Returns persisted property definitions') plus the scope ('with optional filters'), so an agent knows exactly what comes back. There is no sibling tool that returns property metadata, so no explicit differentiation is needed, though none is offered.

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?

It states a concrete use case: discover property identifiers, including custom properties, for search filters and create/update payloads. That is actionable guidance for when to reach for this tool, but it names no conditions for skipping it and no alternatives.

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