get_expression

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It implies a safe read operation via 'get' but does not disclose error behavior (e.g., when no expression exists), return format, or any side effects, which are relevant for a getter tool.

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 short and front-loaded with the main action. However, the Args section merely duplicates schema titles and does not earn its place, making the structure functionally redundant.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter description coverage, the description is too sparse. It omits when to use the tool, what it returns, and how it relates to common alternatives like set_expression or evaluate_expression.

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%, with only titles 'Node Path' and 'Parm Name'. The description's Args section repeats those titles verbatim ('node_path: Node path. parm_name: Parameter name.'), adding no meaning beyond what the schema already shows.

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) and resource (expression on a parameter), so the agent knows it retrieves an expression. It does not distinguish itself from siblings like set_expression or evaluate_expression, but the core action is clear.

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 such as get_parameter, get_parm_references, or evaluate_expression. The description only states what it does, leaving context entirely to inference.

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