get_parameter_schema

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the potentially large response size and the filtering behavior, but does not mention whether the operation is read-only, performance implications, or error conditions. The description is honest but not deeply transparent about behavior beyond the filtering advice.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a crucial performance warning and parameter explanations. Every sentence earns its place; no fluff or repetition of schema details.

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 3-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential usage context: what it returns, how to avoid expensive full dumps, and parameter semantics. It lacks explicit notes on return format or error handling, but these are less critical given the tool's simplicity and the strong parameter guidance.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains node_path, parm_name (exact name for single-parameter lookup), and filter (substring match, case-insensitive), adding meaning beyond the bare schema titles. It could be more explicit about mutual exclusivity of parm_name and filter, but the guidance is sufficient.

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 the template schema for parameters on a node, with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('template schema for parameter(s) on a node'). It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_parameter and get_parameters by focusing on schema retrieval rather than values.

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 explicitly advises when to use parm_name or filter instead of dumping all parameters, and warns that most nodes have dozens or 100+ parameters. This gives clear usage guidance and implicitly contrasts with get_parameter/get_parameters for value retrieval.

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