bw_get_push_schema

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes the fetch operation as non-destructive and lists return values (field names, data types, required fields). No side effects or hidden behaviors left unexplained.

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 sentences with zero waste. First sentence states action and result, second sentence gives usage direction. Information is front-loaded and every sentence 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 getter with one required parameter and no output schema, the description adequately communicates what is returned (field names, data types, required fields). No missing or confusing details.

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% (single parameter adso_name fully described). Description adds usage context ('for an aDSO write interface') but doesn't enrich parameter semantics beyond what schema provides. Slight bonus for contextual framing.

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?

Description clearly states 'Fetch the JSON schema for an aDSO write interface' with specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling tools as it is unique for push schema, and explicitly mentions it returns field names, data types, and required fields.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use this before bw_push_data to know what fields to include in records.' This provides clear when-to-use guidance and an alternative sibling tool reference (bw_push_data). No ambiguity.

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