quantity-takeoff__get_material_pack

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It only lists return fields but does not disclose if the operation is read-only, requires any authentication, or has side effects. The description fails to clarify behavioral aspects.

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 sentence but starts with an unusual bracketed prefix that reads as metadata rather than a clear instruction. While it is succinct, the prefix may confuse agents expecting a standard description.

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 no output schema and no parameters, the description should explain what a material pack is and how the tool identifies it (e.g., implicit context). It fails to address these gaps, leaving the agent unsure of what input or output to expect.

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 input schema has no parameters (100% coverage), so the description does not need to add parameter details. The baseline of 3 applies, and the description offers no extra semantic value for parameters.

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 states it returns a material pack with detailed contents (factors, densities, etc.). However, it is unclear whether this retrieves a specific pack or a default, since no parameters are provided. There is no differentiation from the sibling 'list_material_pack' other than the verb, leaving ambiguity.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_material_pack' or 'get_assembly'. No context about prerequisites or typical use cases is given.

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