Ucontrol Read Umap Model Details

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

Annotations already establish safety (read-only, non-destructive, idempotent). The description adds useful behavioral context by clarifying that omitting 'name' returns all records, which goes beyond the schema and helps the agent anticipate results.

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 efficient sentence of 12 words, front-loading the core purpose and adding only the most essential behavioral note. No redundancy or filler.

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?

For a simple read tool with good annotations and one optional parameter, the description covers all critical context: what it does, the parameter behavior, and the no-name behavior. It does not describe return structure, but no output schema is provided and the tool is straightforward, so this is acceptable.

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 schema has a single 'name' parameter with no description (0% coverage). The description fully compensates by stating 'Omit name to return all records', implying that providing a name returns details for that specific model. This directly clarifies the parameter's meaning and an important edge case.

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 the tool's function: 'read model details' with a specific resource ('uMap API'). It also explains the optional name behavior, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like 'ucontrol_read_umap_models' or 'ucontrol_read_umap_model_cis'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only mentions the behavior of omitting 'name', which is an operational detail, not a usage guideline. No exclusions or alternative tool references are given.

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