get-training-definition

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

No annotations exist, placing the full burden on the description. However, the description only restates the action without disclosing behavior such as return format, error handling if not found, or authorization requirements. This is a minimal descriptor that adds no behavioral insight.

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 one short sentence, front-loaded and free of fluff.

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?

Given the lack of an output schema and annotations, the description should clarify what the tool returns and any edge cases. It doesn't, leaving the agent without adequate information for a complete understanding. The simple nature of the tool slightly mitigates this, but the omission is notable.

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 schema has one parameter 'name' with zero description coverage. The description adds only the phrase 'by name', which merely repeats the parameter's existing name and doesn't provide format, validation, or usage details. It fails to compensate for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 uses the verb 'Get' with resource 'training definition' and specifies 'by name', clearly distinguishing it from the plural list tool get-training-definitions. It tells the agent exactly what action and target.

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 explicit usage guidance is given. The description only implies that this tool is for retrieving a single definition by name, with no mention of when to prefer it over get-training-definitions or any alternatives.

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