get_global_helper

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, and the description doesn't contradict this. It adds valuable context beyond annotations: it specifies the return content ('complete global helper information including Python body code and usage details') and includes permissions requirements ('Permissions:{'all_of': ['View Rules']}'), which are not covered by annotations. However, it doesn't mention rate limits or other behavioral traits.

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 appropriately sized with three sentences: purpose, return details, and permissions. It's front-loaded with the core purpose, and each sentence adds value (return specifics and permissions). Minor improvement could be merging sentences for tighter flow, but it's efficient with zero waste.

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 tool's simplicity (1 parameter, 100% schema coverage, read-only operation, and an output schema exists), the description is complete. It covers purpose, return content, and permissions, which are sufficient for an AI agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly without needing to explain return values (handled by output schema).

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 100%, with the helper_id parameter well-documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides (e.g., no format details or examples beyond the schema's examples). Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 specific action ('Get detailed information') and resource ('Panther global helper by ID'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_global_helpers (which lists helpers) and other get_* tools that fetch different resources. The verb+resource combination is precise and 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?

The description implies usage when detailed information about a specific global helper is needed, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_global_helpers (for browsing) or other get_* tools. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned beyond the permissions requirement.

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