ea_get_diagram_elements

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

The annotations already mark this as read-only, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context: Note objects are included, connectors carry feature-link resolution, and the connector list is the union of explicit and implied connectors. This goes well beyond what the annotations alone convey, though return format details are not described.

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 three sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the core purpose, then adds necessary nuances about Note objects and connector resolution. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a single-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It tells the agent exactly what the response will contain (diagram, elements, connectors), clarifies important inclusion rules, and explains connector semantics. No critical invocation or interpretation details are 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 coverage is 100%, and the diagramId parameter is already documented as 'The Diagram_ID to get elements for.' The description reinforces that the tool targets a specific diagram, but it does not add substantial new meaning beyond the schema.

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 ('Get') and resource ('all elements and connectors placed on a specific diagram') and clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like ea_get_element (single element) and ea_list_elements (likely model-wide listing). It unambiguously states the scope of the tool.

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 use when an agent needs everything on a diagram, including elements and connectors. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the context is clear enough that an agent can select it appropriately among the sibling tools.

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