domain_sieve_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get' without explicitly confirming the operation is read-only, mentioning any required permissions, or describing potential errors or side effects. While 'Get' implies retrieval, it does not disclose enough behavioral context for safe and complete 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, direct sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It contains no redundant words or information, making it highly concise and well-structured for quick agent comprehension.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple retrieval tool, but it lacks contextual guidance regarding when to use it, how it relates to sibling tools, or any prerequisites. The schema covers parameters, but the absence of annotations and usage notes leaves some gaps in completeness, earning a mid-level score.

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 100% description coverage for all three parameters (domain, alias_id, script_id), so the schema already provides the necessary semantics. The tool description adds no additional parameter information, aligning with the baseline score of 3 when schema coverage is high.

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 clearly states the action ('Get') and the specific resource ('a specific Sieve filtering script for an alias'). It is unambiguous and distinguishes itself from siblings like domain_sieve_list (list) and sieve_script_get by specifying the alias scope, making the purpose immediately clear.

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 such as domain_sieve_list or sieve_script_get. There are no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions, and no exclusion criteria are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage purely from the name and schema.

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