itemprototype_get

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful context about the nature of item prototypes and their relationship to discovery rules, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like pagination or output format.

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 consists of just two sentences, with the primary action stated first and a brief explanatory sentence following. No extraneous information is present.

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?

The tool has 11 optional parameters and an output schema. The description explains the core concept (item prototypes from discovery rules) but does not mention filtering or pagination capabilities. However, given the high schema coverage and output schema, the description is mostly adequate.

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?

With schema description coverage at 91%, the schema already documents parameters thoroughly. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond the high-level purpose, so it meets the baseline but doesn't enhance understanding.

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 'Get item prototypes from Zabbix', specifying the action (get) and resource (item prototypes), and distinguishes from siblings like 'item_get' by explaining that prototypes are template items created by discovery rules.

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 compared to alternatives such as 'item_get' or 'discoveryrule_get'. The description lacks context for choosing between sibling tools.

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