Get Ravelry pattern details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that – no rate limits, auth requirements, or batching caveats (the 20-id cap lives in the schema). The field list describes return content, which the output schema already supplies, so it earns only baseline credit.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource before the field enumeration. The long comma list is information-dense rather than padded, though it borders on enumerating what the output schema should carry.

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 an output schema present and rich annotations, the description need not explain return values or safety, and it correctly focuses on purpose and scope. The only real gap is the missing when/when-not guidance relative to search_patterns.

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?

There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage, which already documents origin (from search_patterns), type, and the 1–20 range. The description only restates 'by id' and adds no format or edge-case guidance, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (Get), resource (full details for Ravelry patterns), and access path (by id), and the sibling set makes the distinction clear: search_patterns finds ids, this fetches details, and get_yarn_details covers the other resource. The enumerated field list reinforces exactly what 'full details' means. An agent can route here without opening the schema.

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 phrase 'by id' implies a post-search lookup, but the description never explicitly says to call this after search_patterns rather than in its place, nor does it flag when not to use it (e.g., for bulk browsing). Usage is inferable but not spelled out.

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