GetAttributesByType

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that, such as whether it returns all attributes unfiltered, any performance considerations, or what the returned 'details' include. It essentially restates the purpose without enriching behavioral understanding.

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, well-structured sentence with no filler. The key action and scope are front-loaded immediately, making it easy to scan.

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 read-only, single-parameter tool with annotations, the description covers the basic purpose. However, without an output schema, it does not explain what 'details' are returned, leaving ambiguity about the response shape. This is a clear gap, though the tool remains minimally usable.

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 reported as 0%, and the description only says 'of the given type', which is tautological with the parameter name. It does not explain what the attribute type values represent, the effect of choosing each enum value, or any constraints. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema-level parameter documentation.

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 a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('details of every attribute of the given type'), which clearly conveys what the tool does. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like GetLayers or GetAllProperties, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what it does, with no context, prerequisites, or exclusions. An agent must infer usage from the tool name and schema alone.

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