get_glossary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for transparency. It explains the tool is a read operation, lists return fields with types and constraints (e.g., status can be DISABLED or ENABLED), and includes timestamps and user info. However, it does not mention permissions, error conditions, or pagination behavior.

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 well-structured with Args, Returns, and Example sections. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. While it is detailed, it is appropriately sized for the complexity of the tool (2 parameters, multiple return fields). Could be slightly more concise but still effective.

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, the description enumerates all return fields with types and constraints. Parameter semantics are fully covered. The example adds practical context. For a simple retrieval tool, this is complete and leaves no major gaps.

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 0%, but the description provides comprehensive parameter details: each parameter has a clear description, type, and regex pattern. An example demonstrates usage. This fully compensates for the lack of 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Retrieves detailed information about a specific business glossary in Amazon DataZone.' It uses a specific verb ('retrieves') and resource ('business glossary'), and distinguishes it from siblings like 'get_glossary_term' and 'create_glossary'.

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 provides an example and parameter details, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. Among sibling tools, there are other 'get' operations, but no guidance on when to choose 'get_glossary' over them.

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