openl Get Trace Parameter

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the description only need to add context beyond these. It adds the lazy-loaded condition, but does not disclose behavior like what happens if the parameter is not found or authorization requirements. With annotations covering safety, the description adds moderate value.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that immediately state the action and the condition for use. Every word is necessary, with no redundancy. It is well 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?

Given the simple nature of the tool, good annotations, and complete schema coverage, the description is adequate. It tells what the tool does and when to use it. It could be improved by mentioning the type of return value or error behavior, but overall it is sufficiently complete for an AI agent.

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 has 100% description coverage, with all three parameters (projectId, parameterId, response_format) well described. The description does not add any additional parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline of 3.

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 clearly states the purpose: 'Get lazy-loaded parameter value.' It specifies the verb 'Get' and the resource 'lazy-loaded parameter value,' which distinguishes it from other get tools. The additional context about when to use it (when TraceParameterValue has lazy:true) further clarifies its specific role among sibling 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 explicitly states when to use this tool: 'Use when a TraceParameterValue has lazy:true and parameterId set.' This provides clear context for invocation. However, it does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternative tools for non-lazy parameters, which would have earned a higher score.

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