pdb_describe

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden; it correctly supplies the key trait 'read-only,' which is genuinely useful. It does not say what happens with an unknown procedure name, whether names are case-sensitive, or how the inspection result should be interpreted.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource before the read-only note. The 'Expert discovery:' prefix is mild flavor but not wasteful.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the read-only nature is stated. For a one-parameter introspection tool this covers the essentials, with only the name-if-unknown behavior left implicit.

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% for the single 'name' parameter, so the description must compensate. It implies the parameter is a GIMP PDB procedure name via 'one GIMP PDB procedure,' which is meaningful, but gives no format, source, or naming conventions.

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?

States a specific verb (inspect) and resource (arguments and returns of one GIMP PDB procedure), so the agent knows it is a metadata/introspection call. It implies differentiation from pdb_search by emphasizing 'one' procedure, but never names the sibling that lists many.

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?

'Expert discovery' hints at the intended audience and context, which implies usage after finding a procedure name. However, there is no explicit when-to-use vs pdb_search, no prerequisite that a name must already be known, and no exclusions.

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