get_parameter_schema

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read operation ('Get'), but does not state that it is read-only, whether it has side effects, what permissions are required, or what happens when the node or parameter is missing. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. However, the phrase 'parameter(s)' is slightly imprecise and the sentence could more clearly convey that parm_name is optional and that filter exists.

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?

The tool has three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, so the description should explain return behavior and parameter meaning. It instead only names the resource being fetched. An agent lacks enough context to call the tool correctly, especially regarding filter and the shape of the returned 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for all three parameters. It vaguely maps 'node' to node_path and 'parameter(s)' to parm_name, but never explains what filter means or what format node_path expects. No parameter semantics beyond the obvious are provided.

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 states a specific verb-resource pair: retrieving the template schema for parameter(s) on a node. It is clear enough to distinguish from broad reads like get_context_info, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from get_parameter, which also deals with parameters. The term 'template schema' is somewhat specialized but still communicative.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool instead of get_parameter, get_attribute_info, or other sibling parameter tools. It does not state prerequisites, typical scenarios, or exclusions. An agent must infer usage from the name and description alone.

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