get_ai_prompts

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It implies a read-only GET operation, but does not confirm safety, idempotency, or potential side effects. The lack of details on response format or rate limits leaves significant ambiguity.

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 very short, but the first line repeats the tool name. It includes the HTTP method and a tag, which is useful but not optimally structured. The brevity does not compensate for the lack of clarity; each sentence could be more informative.

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 and no annotations, the description fails to explain what the tool returns or its role in the system. Without additional context, the agent cannot determine the response structure or how 'AI prompts' relate to the broader API (e.g., ai_completion).

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is effectively 100% (empty schema). The description adds no parameter information, which is acceptable given no parameters exist. Baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 'Get A I Prompts' but does not clarify what AI prompts are or how they differ from sibling tools like ai_completion. The tag 'AI completions' provides a vague hint, but the purpose remains ambiguous without specifying the returned resource's nature.

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. There is no mention of when not to use it, or any comparison with siblings like ai_completion, get_agents, etc., leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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