prompts_get_current

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose that the content is 'cached locally by strands-hub', which is a meaningful behavioral trait. However, it leaves force_refresh behavior, cache staleness, and remote-fetch-on-miss semantics unexplained.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is efficient, though the brevity comes at the cost of omitting important parameter and usage details.

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?

While the output schema removes the need to describe return values, the description remains incomplete for a tool with no annotations. It lacks usage guidance, force_refresh semantics, and cache behavior details. The description is minimal rather than sufficient.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It implicitly references agent_id via 'for an agent', but the force_refresh parameter is entirely undocumented in both the schema and description. This is a significant gap for a parameter that controls tool behavior.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and a clear resource ('current system prompt content for an agent'). The parenthetical about local caching adds useful specificity. It does not explicitly distinguish from sibling prompts_get_version, but 'current' vs 'version' provides an implicit distinction.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus prompts_get_version or prompts_list_versions. There is no mention of freshness requirements, caching trade-offs, or when force_refresh should be used. An agent has no basis to select this tool over its siblings.

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