get_plant

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only restates the function ('returns summary') without disclosing side effects, return format, error behavior, or any operational nuances. For a simple getter, this is minimal but not rich.

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 efficient sentence with no wasted words. However, it is under-specified, which limits the value of its brevity.

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?

With an optional 'as_of' parameter, no annotation coverage, and no parameter explanations, the description is incomplete. The existence of an output schema helps, but the description fails to guide proper invocation or parameter usage.

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%, and the description does not explain either parameter. 'name' is inferable from context, but 'as_of' is completely undocumented, leaving a significant gap for the agent.

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 returns a current status summary for a single plant. This is a specific verb+resource combination that differentiates it from siblings like list_plants (all plants) and plant_history (historical data).

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 usage when one wants the current status of a single plant. However, it provides no explicit exclusions or comparisons to alternatives like plant_history or list_plants, leaving some inference required.

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