lc_get_runtime_metadata

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

The description only indicates a read operation ('Fetch'), but with no annotations provided, it should disclose more behavioral traits such as whether it returns large datasets, rate limits, or requires specific permissions. It lacks depth.

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 unnecessary words. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness.

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?

With 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief to fully inform an agent. It does not explain what runtime metadata is, what the output contains, or how the parameters interact.

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%, yet the description only vaguely references 'explicit org' and 'optionally filtered by entity', leaving out the 'limit' parameter and the distinction between entity_name and entity_type. It does not add significant 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 'Fetch runtime metadata for an explicit org', which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from sibling 'lc_get_*' tools by specifying runtime metadata, but does not elaborate on what constitutes runtime metadata.

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 like lc_get_org_info or lc_get_org_config_value. There is no mention of when not to use it or any prerequisites.

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