upstash_redis_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention what happens if the key does not exist, auth requirements beyond the schema, or any rate limits. The simple statement does not add transparency beyond the basic operation.

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, clear sentence that is front-loaded and easily parsed. However, it is slightly under-specified, lacking any additional context that could earn its place, such as return value hints. Still, it achieves conciseness without waste.

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 the simplicity of the tool (4 parameters, no output schema), the description is somewhat complete but misses useful details like the return value format (e.g., string or null), error handling, or confirmation that the operation is read-only. It is adequate but not enriching.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters adequately. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema (e.g., it does not explain how to format the key or the expected return value). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get the value of a key from an Upstash Redis database' uses a specific verb ('get') and clearly identifies the resource ('a key' from an 'Upstash Redis database'), distinguishing it from siblings like upstash_redis_set (set) and upstash_redis_del (delete).

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 alternatives (e.g., upstash_redis_list_keys for listing keys, or upstash_redis_get vs. other get operations). The description simply states the action without context on prerequisites or exclusions.

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