get_attribute_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It fails to disclose whether this is read-only, what metadata is returned, error behavior for missing attributes/nodes, or output format.

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?

Very terse and front-loaded. The Args block is somewhat redundant with the schema parameter names, but the description contains no wasted prose.

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?

This is a read operation with no annotations, no output schema, and zero schema description coverage. The description should clarify what metadata is returned and typical use cases, but instead leaves major gaps for the agent.

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 lists all three parameters and provides the meaning for attrib_class ('point', 'prim', 'vertex', or 'detail'), which is genuinely useful. However, node_path and attrib_name are only described tautologically ('Node path.', 'Attribute name.') without format details.

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 clear verb+resource: 'Get metadata for a geometry attribute.' This distinguishes it from siblings like get_attrib_values, get_attrib_stats, and get_geometry_info, though it doesn't explicitly name them. The core purpose is unambiguous.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_attrib_values or get_attrib_stats. The description is purely definitional with no usage context or exclusions.

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