GetGDLParametersOfElements

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe, non-open-world read. The description adds that each parameter is returned as name/type/value, which clarifies the return shape. However, it says nothing about whether the call is per-element or batched, whether results are ordered like the input, or any size limits, which are open questions for a multi-element fetch.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that delivers the verb, resource, scope, and returned fields with no waste. The appended '(Tapir, Element Commands)' is a minor inventory tag rather than description content, so it is not a 5.

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 one-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers what comes back (name/type/value per GDL parameter) and annotations cover safety, so it is minimally complete. It still leaves the agent to infer the relationship with SetGDLParametersOfElements and whether the call is batched per element, which a more complete definition would state.

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 0% and there is one required parameter, 'elements', documented only structurally (an array of {elementId: {guid}}). The description says the parameters are fetched 'of the given elements', implying the input is the set to inspect, but it does not explain the nesting, the required guid, or what happens with an unknown/empty list. Baseline 3 is appropriate: the schema shape is unambiguous even if undescribed.

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?

States a specific verb ('Gets') and resource ('GDL parameters') with the exact fields returned (name, type, value) and the scope ('of the given elements'). The sibling SetGDLParametersOfElements is clearly the write counterpart, so an agent can distinguish them without opening either schema.

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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of the closest alternative SetGDLParametersOfElements. The parenthetical '(Tapir, Element Commands)' is a namespace tag, not usage guidance. An agent must infer context from the name alone.

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