sylve_api_schema

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a useful behavioral detail beyond annotations: it returns the schema with $refs resolved, which tells the agent what kind of output to expect.

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 with no wasted text. The primary purpose is front-loaded, followed by the prerequisite for finding the operation.

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 read-only schema introspection tool whose annotations already convey safety. The description explains what is returned ('full request/response schema with $refs resolved') and the required discovery step, which is sufficient given the schema and absence of an output schema.

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 75%, and the schema documents node, path, and context, while method is constrained by an enum. The description only implies that method and path identify 'one Swagger operation'; it adds no further meaning about the node or context parameters.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Show the full request/response schema ... for one Swagger operation.' It also distinguishes this tool from the discovery step by directing the agent to sylve_api_search first, making its purpose clear without opening the schema.

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 a clear prerequisite: use sylve_api_search to find the operation before calling this tool. It does not explicitly mention sylve_api_call or state when not to use this tool, but the intended workflow is clear.

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