get_levels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey safety and behavior. 'List' implies a read-only operation, and the mention of sorting bottom-to-top is additional behavioral detail. It doesn't discuss return format or edge cases, but for a simple listing tool, it is sufficiently transparent.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that conveys all essential information without waste. Each word earns its place, and the structure is ideal for an agent to quickly understand the tool.

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 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the core behavior: it lists all levels and their elevations, sorted. It could possibly mention the output structure (e.g., array of objects), but for a straightforward tool, this is reasonably complete.

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 schema coverage is 100% (empty schema). With no parameters to explain, the baseline of 4 applies, and the description adds value by stating what is returned (levels with elevations) and the ordering.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('all levels in the model'), and adds details about elevations and sorting. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_categories (which lists categories) and other list-like tools.

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 clearly implies when to use it (whenever levels are needed) and provides context (all levels, sorted). It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is unambiguous for a simple listing tool.

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