Get Schema By Name

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the tool 'Returns the entire schema', which is a key behavioral trait, and clarifies a practical use case. The read-only nature is implied by 'Retrieve'. No contradictions or unexpected side effects are hidden.

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 quite concise, with only two sentences that convey the primary action and a use case. However, it suffers from a minor formatting issue ('schema.This' lacks a space), and the second sentence could be more integrated. Still, it is well-structured and efficient.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is complete. It states what is returned (the entire schema), how to identify the schema (fully-qualified name), and why it might be used (discovering field names). No additional context is needed for correct invocation.

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 provides 100% coverage for the single 'name' parameter, including an example. The description adds only the phrase 'fully-qualified name', which essentially restates the schema's own description. Thus, the description provides no additional semantic value beyond the 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 tool retrieves a single schema by fully-qualified name, which distinguishes it from siblings like get_schema_by_id (by ID) and get_all_schemas (all schemas). The verb 'Retrieve' is specific and the resource 'schema' is 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?

The description provides a clear use case by explaining that it can be used to discover field names for files in manifests using the schema. It implies when to use this tool (when you have the fully-qualified name) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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