get_community_space

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

The description discloses meaningful behavioral details beyond the annotations: read-only lookup against the live school, no creation or mutation, server-side auth injection, throttling under LearnWorlds' 30-per-10s cap, retry behavior on 429/5xx, and exact error status semantics. This is strong additional transparency and does not contradict any annotation.

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 well-structured with clear scannable sections: endpoint, behavior, returns, and use-when guidance. Every sentence adds useful information, and the key read-only nature is front-loaded.

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 lookup with no output schema, the description covers endpoint path, invocation behavior, return format, error semantics, authentication, throttling, and alternatives. Nothing an agent needs to decide whether and how to call this tool 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 coverage is 100% and the only parameter is already described as 'Unique identifier of the community space'. The description adds modest context by saying the resource is 'specified by the provided space id', 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 and resource: 'Get a community space' with the endpoint 'GET /v2/community/spaces/{id}', and clarifies it returns information for the space specified by the provided id. This distinguishes it from the plural list tool get_community_spaces and from the related write 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?

It explicitly states when to use the tool: 'safe to call speculatively for lookups and reporting', and when not to: 'Not for changing anything — use the matching write tool.' It even names several related Community tools, giving the agent clear routing guidance.

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