get_pre_built_design

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

The description states 'Read-only', which signals no side effects, but with no annotations provided, it fails to disclose other behaviors such as error handling, authentication requirements, or response format. Only minimal transparency is achieved.

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?

A single sentence that is concise, front-loaded with the key qualifier 'Read-only', and contains zero redundant words. Every word earns its place.

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 retrieval tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and read-only nature. It lacks details about the return value or error cases, but is mostly complete given the low complexity.

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 sole parameter 'design_id' is described in the schema as 'ID of the pre-built design to retrieve'. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond this, and schema coverage is 100%, so baseline score applies.

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 action 'retrieve' and the resource 'SendGrid pre-built design', with a 'Read-only' prefix that distinguishes it from mutation tools. Siblings like 'list_pre_built_designs' or 'get_design' have different scopes, making purpose unambiguous.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_pre_built_designs' or 'get_design'. Usage is implied from the name and description, but no when-not-to-use or alternative comparisons are provided.

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