get_send_level

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

No annotations provided. The description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether this is a read-only operation, any side effects, or required permissions. The term 'Get' implies read-only, but this is implicit.

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 concise with two sentences, but the parameter details are presented in a list format which is clear and front-loaded. No extraneous information.

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 is a simple getter with two integer parameters and no output schema, the description provides the essential purpose and parameter meaning. However, it omits information about the return value (e.g., level as a float), which would help the agent understand output format.

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%, but the description adds meaningful context: it explains that send_index 0 corresponds to send A, 1 to B, etc., which clarifies the integer encoding beyond the raw 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('send level') and further clarifies the source/destination ('from a track to a return track'). This clearly differentiates it from siblings like 'set_send_level'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., set_send_level). The description does not provide context about prerequisites or scenarios.

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