Get module/class help

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, but the description adds context: offline knowledge base, return format with formatted text or {found:false, suggestions[]}. This goes beyond the structured fields. No contradictions.

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 sentences, front-loaded with 'Read-only', and contains no fluff. It efficiently conveys purpose, output, and alternative.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains return values (formatted text or found:false with suggestions). It covers source (offline), scope (class/module), and alternative, making it complete for a single-param read-only tool.

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?

The only parameter 'name' is fully described in the schema with examples. The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 provides human-readable Markdown help for TouchDesigner Python classes/modules from an offline knowledge base. It distinguishes from get_td_class_details by specifying the output format (Markdown vs structured JSON).

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 explicitly names get_td_class_details as the alternative when structured JSON is needed, and implies use for human-readable output. It also mentions the fallback behavior with suggestions for unknown names.

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