get_experiment_by_name

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

Annotation already declares readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds the behavioral aspect of using name as identifier. However, it lacks disclosure of what constitutes 'details' or any error conditions.

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 is front-loaded, containing no extraneous words.

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 simple read-only tool with no output schema, the description is incomplete as it omits what 'details' are returned (e.g., metadata, metrics) and lacks guidance on error cases.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description must compensate but provides no additional meaning about the 'name' parameter beyond its existence, failing to mention format, constraints, or examples.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' and resource 'experiment details', and differentiates the tool by the input method 'by name' compared to presumably ID-based alternatives among 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?

The description implies convenience over ID-based retrieval but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_experiments or search_experiments.

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