timeline_get_by_index

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already conveys the read-only nature. The description adds the 1-based indexing convention, which is useful, but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as error behavior for out-of-range indices or what 'info' includes. This is acceptable given the output schema.

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 filler. It conveys the essential information efficiently.

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 one param and an output schema, the description is sufficient. It does not need to list return fields because the output schema exists, and the read-only hint is annotated. The only minor gap is the lack of explicit usage guidance, but the overall context is complete.

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 100%, and the schema already explains '1-based position of the timeline in the project.' The description merely repeats '1-based index' without adding new meaning or context beyond the schema.

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 a specific verb ('Return info') and clearly identifies the resource ('a timeline') and the selection mechanism ('at the given 1-based index'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like timeline_get_current or timeline_get_count.

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 you have an index (1-based), but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives (e.g., timeline_get_current) or provide exclusionary guidance. The usage context is inferred from the parameter description.

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