lc_get_hive_record

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states only the basic function but omits key details: whether it is read-only, error behavior if the record is missing, required permissions, or any side effects. The description is insufficient for a tool with no annotation support.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words, achieving high conciseness. It front-loads the action and resource. However, it may be excessively terse given the lack of supporting information in the schema or annotations.

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?

The tool has 4 parameters, 3 required, no output schema, and no annotations. The description fails to explain what a 'Hive record' is, how the parameters identify the record, or what the function returns. Important contexts like return value format or error handling are absent, making the description incomplete.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the tool description adds no explanation of the parameters. While names like oid, hive_name, key, and partition_key are somewhat self-explanatory, the description does not clarify their roles or how they should be used together, leaving the agent to infer from names 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 'Fetch one Hive record's data payload' clearly specifies the action (fetch), resource (Hive record), and scope (data payload). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like lc_get_hive_record_metadata and lc_get_hive_schema, which retrieve different aspects of the same resource.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For instance, it does not explain that this tool retrieves the payload while lc_get_hive_record_metadata retrieves metadata, or mention any prerequisites or context for use.

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