Get Paramset

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

The description reveals that the tool reads runtime state (VALUES), config (MASTER), or link params, and that interface is auto-resolved. Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description adds specific behavioral context without contradiction.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose and then adds the critical nuance about link paramsets. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 4 parameters (2 required), an output schema exists, and annotations are present, the description covers the key aspects: the three paramset types, the special link partner case, and auto-resolution. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to use correctly.

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% (all parameters described), but the description adds extra meaning: it clarifies the paramsetKey values ('VALUES', 'MASTER', or a link partner's address) and confirms the auto-resolution of the interface parameter. This adds value beyond the schema definitions.

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 uses a clear verb ('read') and identifies the resource ('parameters for a channel'). It distinguishes three types of paramsets (VALUES, MASTER, link paramset) and explains the special usage for link paramsets via the paramsetKey field. This differentiates it from siblings like put_paramset.

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 by stating what the tool does and mentions using list_links to find partners, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., put_paramset for writing). There is no direct guidance on when not to use this tool.

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