get_sorted_set

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions retrieval by score range or rank but does not explain the meaning of start/stop (ranks), default direction, or inclusion of scores. Without annotations, these gaps are critical for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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?

Single sentence that is clear and not verbose. However, it could be improved by front-loading the most critical details. It earns its place but is slightly under-informative for a tool with no annotations.

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 complexity (5 parameters, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It does not explain the relationship between start/stop and rank versus score, nor what is returned (members with scores?). Sibling tools are many, but context about this tool's specific scenario is missing.

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 high (80%), but the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema fields. It vaguely refers to 'score range or rank' without clarifying how parameters relate. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema largely explains parameters, but the tool description offers no extra semantics.

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 the action (Get), resource (members from a sorted set), and method (by score range or rank). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_set (regular set) and add_sorted_set (adding). However, it could be more explicit about the dual retrieval methods (score vs rank).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_set for regular sets or list_keys for general key listing. The description does not specify prerequisites, limitations, or context where this tool is appropriate.

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