bw_get_planning_function

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

The description states 'Read' which implies a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly declare this or mention any side effects, permissions, or restrictions. Since no annotations are provided, the description could be more explicit about the safe, non-destructive nature of the tool.

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 and informative, covering the purpose, return fields, and example types. It could be slightly more structured (e.g., breaking out the returned items), but it is efficient and free of 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 lack of an output schema, the description lists the key returned elements (name, description, function type, aggregation level, etc.) and includes specific details like FOX code for formula functions. It adequately covers the tool's capabilities for a read operation, though it could mention prerequisites (e.g., existence of the planning function).

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% with a single parameter that has a clear description. The description adds context about what the tool retrieves (e.g., function types, FOX code) but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema for the parameter itself. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Read a Planning Function (TLOGO PLSE) definition' and specifies the types of planning operations. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'bw_get_planning_properties' and 'bw_get_planning_sequence' by focusing on the full definition including characteristic usage and parameter tree.

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 clear context on what the tool does and what it returns, implying usage when a detailed definition of a planning function is needed. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives among the many read tools.

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