get_tool_schema

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the sequence context that this is a middle step between search_tools and call_tool, but says nothing about return format, size of schemas, or failure behavior for unknown names.

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?

Two short sentences with zero waste; the purpose is front-loaded and the follow-up action follows immediately. Nothing is repeated from the schema or 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?

For a single-parameter lookup tool with no output schema, the description covers what it does and where it fits in the search_tools → get_tool_schema → call_tool flow. The only real gap is not clarifying the expected identifier format for 'name'.

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 0%, so the lone 'name' parameter is undocumented in the schema. The description partially compensates by indicating the value identifies 'one operation found with search_tools', but it does not specify whether this is the operation name, an ID, or the exact string format returned by search_tools.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get the full input schema of one operation'), which is clearly distinct from discovery (search_tools) and invocation (call_tool). The phrase 'one operation' is slightly vague about what constitutes an operation, but the intent is unambiguous.

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?

Gives explicit workflow guidance: it is used on an operation 'found with search_tools', and the follow-up step is 'invoke it with call_tool'. This routes the agent correctly between both siblings. It stops short of stating when NOT to use it (e.g., if the schema is already known or the tool takes no parameters).

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