parse_get_schema

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the authentication requirement ('Requiere master key') and outlines the schema contents (fields, types, relationships, CLP), providing meaningful behavioral context beyond the function name alone.

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, using two short sentences. The main action and resource are front-loaded, followed by clarifying details and the auth requirement. 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 get tool with one parameter and no annotations or output schema, the description sufficiently explains what the returned schema contains, the requirement for master key, and the target scope. It could explicitly state it's read-only, but that is strongly implied by the verb 'obtiene'.

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 input schema already contains a description for className ('Nombre de la clase'). The description adds that the class is specific and what the schema includes, but does not significantly elaborate on the parameter's format or usage beyond the existing schema.

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 verb 'obtiene' and the resource 'schema completo de una clase específica', enumerating fields, data types, relationships, and permissions. This differentiates it from sibling tools like parse_get_schemas by emphasizing a single specific class.

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 implies usage for retrieving a single class schema but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. It notes the prerequisite of a master key, but lacks guidance on when to prefer this tool over parse_get_schemas or other schema-related tools.

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