get_selection

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

The description only says 'get information' without specifying what that information includes (e.g., node IDs, types, count). With no annotations to compensate, the behavioral disclosure is minimal. For a read-only tool, the lack of detail on output format or scope is a gap.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the purpose. Every word is necessary and no extraneous information exists.

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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description adequately defines the tool as a selection reader, but it could be more complete by hinting at what 'information' is returned (e.g., node IDs, types, bounds). It meets minimum viability.

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?

There are no parameters, so the schema already fully defines inputs. The baseline is 4 because the description adds no extra semantics, but none are needed.

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 tool retrieves information about the current selection, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('selection'). It differentiates from siblings like get_node_info (which targets a specific node by ID) and set_selections (which modifies the selection).

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 implies usage when the current selection info is needed, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_node_info or when not to use it. There are no exclusions or context hints.

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