get_growth_plan

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It adds the useful fact that the plan is 'cached', implying possible staleness, but does not disclose what happens if no cached plan exists, authentication requirements, or any side effects. This is a read-only operation, but the description remains minimal.

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 a single concise sentence, 'Get the latest cached growth plan for a site', with no redundant words or vague elaboration. Every word contributes to the meaning.

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 getter with only one parameter and no output schema, the description gives the core purpose, but it lacks information about the return format, what a growth plan contains, or failure behavior when no cached plan exists. Given the simplicity, this is adequate but with clear gaps.

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 100% (site_id described as 'Site ID'), so the schema already fully documents the parameter. The description adds no additional meaning beyond aligning 'for a site' with the site_id parameter. 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?

The description clearly states the action (get), the resource (latest cached growth plan), and the scope (for a site). It distinguishes itself from the sibling generate_growth_plan by emphasizing 'cached', making clear this retrieves an existing plan rather than creating one.

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 usage context is implied: 'latest cached' suggests retrieval rather than generation, but there is no explicit statement about when to use this tool versus alternatives like generate_growth_plan, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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