get_rsvp_page

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

With readOnlyHint=true annotation, the description adds minor context about the returned fields (title, intro copy, etc.), but does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond what annotations already imply. No mention of side effects or limitations.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the verb and resource, and efficiently conveys the purpose and scope.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately lists representative fields. It could be more complete by noting that it returns a full RSVP page settings object, but the coverage is sufficient for understanding its purpose.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so there is no structural deficiency. The description adds meaning by listing example fields (title, intro copy, visibility, customization) that the tool returns, going beyond the empty schema.

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 'Get the RSVP page settings on the wedding website' with specific examples of fields (title, intro copy, visibility, customization). This is a specific verb+resource that distinguishes it from generic 'get_website_customizations' or 'get_wedding_settings'.

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 retrieving RSVP page settings, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like 'get_website_customizations' or 'list_pages'. No guidance on exclusions or prerequisites.

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