get_diagram

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses that the tool fetches the latest state from the browser, includes manual edits, and that the output contains cell IDs and structure. However, it doesn't mention potential prerequisites (e.g., active session) or error behavior, which would make it more complete.

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 concise, consisting of two purposeful sentences. The first sentence states the primary function and an important behavioral detail, while the second gives a targeted usage instruction. No wasted words.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is exceptionally complete. It explains what the tool returns (diagram XML), the freshness guarantee (latest from browser, manual edits), and when to call it relative to edit_diagram. The only minor omission is potential session requirements, but this is not critical given the simplicity.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is trivially 100% covered. The description adds value by explaining what the output contains (XML with cell IDs and structure), which helps the agent understand the result even though there are no inputs to clarify.

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's purpose: 'Get the current diagram XML.' It specifically distinguishes this from sibling tools like edit_diagram by emphasizing it fetches the latest state including manual edits, which is a unique read-only function.

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?

It provides explicit usage guidance: 'Call this BEFORE edit_diagram if you need to update or delete existing elements, so you can see the current cell IDs and structure.' This tells the agent exactly when to use this tool relative to an alternative.

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