quickshell_get_type

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It states the operation is a fetch (implying read-only) and mentions the output is Markdown and the default version. However, it does not disclose potential errors, rate limits, or any side effects, which is acceptable for a read-only tool but leaves some unknown.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and examples, then a usage tip and default. Each sentence earns its place; 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?

Given it is a simple doc-fetch tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential usage: what it does, examples, case-sensitivity, and default version. It doesn't mention alternatives like quickshell_get_qt_type, but the 'QML type' phrasing implies the distinction. Overall, an agent has enough to correctly select and invoke the tool.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides examples for type_name and namespace, and explains case-sensitivity, which helps the agent form valid arguments. However, it does not describe the accepted format for version beyond 'latest', nor how to discover available versions (despite a sibling list_versions). It adds value but not fully comprehensive.

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 fetches a documentation page for a QML type as Markdown, with concrete examples (PanelWindow, HyprlandMonitor). It distinguishes from siblings by specifying 'QML type' vs Qt types, though it does not explicitly name alternatives. The purpose is unambiguous and specific.

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?

It explicitly instructs to call quickshell_list_types first when unsure of namespace/type name, and notes case-sensitivity. This gives clear when-to-use guidance and references a sibling tool, leaving no ambiguity about prerequisites.

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