Get Assets

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint) and openWorldHint. The description adds valuable behavioral context by noting results 'may be truncated by the limit parameter', which is not captured in the annotations or schema. No contradiction exists.

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?

Two succinct sentences front-load the tool's purpose and enumerate key filter options. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 presence of an output schema and comprehensive annotations, the description sufficiently covers the key context: the resource type, filter dimensions, and limit behavior. It could optionally mention pagination or default results when no filters are applied, but these are not necessary given the structured schema.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description lists the filter fields in natural language (asset ID, pool participant, operating status, asset type) that map directly to schema properties, and mentions the limit's truncation effect. It does not add new meaning beyond the schema's property names, types, and defaults.

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 explicitly states the tool returns 'AESO market asset registry records', a specific resource type, and lists the optional filtering dimensions. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on prices, load, generation, and other market 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 for querying asset registry records and mentions optional filters, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. Sibling tools are listed separately, so users must infer from context.

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