get_properties

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get' implies a read-only operation, and the prefix filter is clarified. However, the description does not state what the response contains (names, values, or both), nor any permissions or rate limits. For a read tool, this is a moderate transparency gap.

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?

A single, clear sentence that immediately states the verb, object, and filter. No extraneous information.

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 one-parameter read tool, the description covers the core input and purpose. However, the absence of an output schema or any description of the return format leaves some ambiguity about what the agent can expect, and there is no mention of pagination or result limits.

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 description explicitly explains that the 'prefix' parameter filters property names by their starting characters, adding critical meaning to an otherwise bare schema. It also hints at the naming convention (config/feature flags), which helps the agent construct valid prefixes.

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 account properties filtered by a name prefix. The parenthetical '(config/feature flags)' provides additional context on the property types, making the purpose unambiguous and distinct from write operations like upsert_properties.

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 implies the tool is for reading properties with a given prefix but does not explicitly mention when to use it over alternatives, nor does it discuss limitations or exclusions. There is no comparison with sibling tools like upsert_properties, so usage guidance is only implied.

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