Get collection

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

With no annotations provided, the description must convey behavior, and it does indicate a read-like fetch operation and the returned content ('full field schema, rules and indexes'). However, it does not disclose response shape, error behavior, authentication needs, or any side effects, so behavioral transparency is limited.

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 a single clear sentence with the action and resource front-loaded. It contains no filler, redundant wording, or unnecessary detail.

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 simple two-parameter tool with 100% schema coverage, the description covers the core purpose, selection criteria, and returned content. It lacks explicit return format or error-case guidance, but the tool's low complexity makes this a minor gap rather than a critical one.

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 input schema already fully documents both parameters: idOrName and fields with descriptions. The description adds context about default returned contents but does not add new meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Fetch'), a clear resource ('a single collection'), and a precise selection method ('by its id or name'). It also states the key contents that will be returned ('full field schema, rules and indexes'). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_collections and get_record.

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 implies when to use this tool: when you need a single collection's full definition by id or name. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives such as list_collections for listing all collections or when not to use this tool.

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