sieve_script_get

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states 'Requires alias credentials,' which is already documented in the schema. It does not disclose return format, error behavior, or side effects. For a read-only operation, the read-only nature is implied but not stated.

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 two short sentences, with the purpose front-loaded. There is no redundant or unnecessary text.

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 there is no output schema and no annotations, the description should at least mention what the tool returns (e.g., the Sieve script content) or clarify when to use it. It simply states the action and credential requirement, leaving gaps in context. However, for a simple get operation, it is minimally adequate.

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?

All three parameters have detailed descriptions in the schema (including an example for alias_username and a cross-reference for alias_password). The description adds no additional parameter-specific information beyond what the schema already provides, so the score is the baseline 3.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('a specific Sieve script for an alias'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like sieve_scripts_list (list all) and sieve_script_delete. It is unambiguous about the action and target.

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. It mentions that alias credentials are required but does not specify scenarios when to use it or when to prefer e.g., domain_sieve_get. The scope is implied by the name and 'for an alias' but not explicit.

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