spss_get_method_schema

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

With no annotations, the description bears the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states this is a retrieval operation but doesn't elaborate on side effects, prerequisites, or registry behavior. 'Registry-backed' adds some context, but the description remains minimal.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and followed by a purpose clause. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 introspection tool with an output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and usage. It could be slightly more complete by detailing the tool_name parameter, but the overall simplicity and schema presence make this sufficient.

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%, and the description does not explain the meaning of 'tool_name'. Although the parameter name is self-evident, the description fails to explicitly connect it to the SPSS method being inspected, leaving the agent to infer from the tool name alone.

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's function: 'Get the JSON schema for a registry-backed SPSS method.' This is a specific verb+resource that distinguishes it from siblings like spss_list_supported_methods and spss_get_method_support by focusing on schema retrieval.

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 for when to use the tool: 'Useful for structured orchestration and parameter inspection before execution.' It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the use case is specific enough to guide an agent.

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