Get Algorithm Help

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

The description indicates a read-only retrieval operation ('get'), which is consistent with the readOnlyHint annotation. It adds that it returns parameter details, outputs, and description, but does not provide additional behavioral context such as error conditions or permissions beyond what annotations already convey.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word adds value; no unnecessary information is present.

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's simplicity (one parameter, read-only, with output schema), the description adequately covers the return structure (parameters, outputs, description). It does not discuss possible errors or format details, but the presence of an output schema reduces the need for additional return value explanation.

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 algorithm_id is not described in the description; the description only lists the kinds of information returned (parameters, outputs, etc.) but does not clarify what algorithm_id represents or how to obtain it. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate and adds no meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'detailed help for a processing algorithm', specifying exactly what is returned (parameters, outputs, description). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like execute_processing (which runs algorithms) and list_processing_algorithms (which lists algorithms).

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 implies use when detailed information about a specific algorithm is needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide any exclusion criteria. Guidance is limited to the implicit purpose.

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