get_example_topology

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

No annotations are provided; description indicates the output is a mutable spec and that the tool is for inspection, but does not explicitly state it is read-only or describe error behavior, so some burden remains.

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?

Single sentence with examples, front-loads the main action; efficient but includes illustrative use cases that add value without excessive length.

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 single-param getter with an output schema, the description provides workflow context and parameter sourcing; minor gaps in error handling are acceptable given the simplicity.

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 only parameter 'name' is explained as the name of an example topology from list_example_topologies, giving the agent a source of valid values; schema itself has no 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?

Clearly states it retrieves the 'full node/link spec' for a named example topology, referencing list_example_topologies as source and build_topology as subsequent step, which distinguishes it from sibling tools.

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?

Explains the tool is for inspecting/editing an example topology before building, mentions passing to build_topology; implies alternatives like deploy_example_topology for direct deployment, though not explicitly excluded.

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