tp_get_equipment

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'List equipment', omitting any details about access restrictions (e.g., coach-only via the athlete parameter), read-only nature, or return format. The bare statement provides minimal transparency beyond the literal function.

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 with no filler. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it immediately understandable and efficient.

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?

This is a simple list tool with two optional parameters and no output schema. The description is minimally adequate but lacks context about filtering by type, the coach-only athlete scope, and what fields are returned. Given low complexity, the gaps are notable but not severe.

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 coverage is 50% (only the 'athlete' parameter has a description). The description doesn't explain the 'type' filter behavior or the 'athlete' targeting option, failing to compensate for the undocumented parameter. The parenthetical '(bikes, shoes)' hints at the type enum but does not explicitly connect it to the parameter.

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 'List equipment (bikes, shoes)', providing a specific verb ('list') and resource ('equipment') with scope. It effectively distinguishes this from sibling CRUD tools like tp_create_equipment, tp_update_equipment, and tp_delete_equipment by focusing on the read/list operation.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention that tp_create_equipment, tp_update_equipment, or tp_delete_equipment handle mutations, nor does it specify any prerequisites or context for listing equipment.

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