get_variable

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It implies a read operation ('Gets') but does not disclose error behavior (e.g., if variable_key does not exist), authentication needs, or idempotency. The presence of an output schema is not referenced.

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 clear sentence with no extraneous information. It is optimally concise for a simple getter tool.

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 has only one parameter and an output schema exists, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not explain the return value structure (though output schema covers it) or error conditions, which would be helpful for a complete understanding.

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 0% and the description adds no explanation for the single required parameter 'variable_key'. Without any additional context on its format, allowed values, or relationship to other parameters (none), the agent must rely solely on the parameter name.

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?

Description clearly states 'Gets the value of a specific variable' with verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling tools like list_variables (which lists all) and get_xcom_entry (different resource). However, lacks explicit mention of Airflow Variables context, which is implied by sibling names.

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?

No guidance provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_variables or get_xcom_entry. There is no statement of context, exclusions, or prerequisites. Despite simplicity, the description offers no direction for selection.

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