get_prompt

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses return format (JSON with messages array) and argument structure (dict mapping names to values). Lacks details on error handling, safety (read-only), or missing names, but provides core behavioral context.

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?

Three sentences, no fluff, front-loaded with purpose, then return format and argument structure. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

With an output schema present, the description covers input and output adequately. However, it omits potential error cases (e.g., missing name) and does not connect to siblings like list_prompts for discoverability. Overall sufficient for a simple retrieval tool.

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% with parameter descriptions. The description reinforces that arguments should be a dict, adding minimal value beyond the schema. The mention of 'rendered prompt' relates to output, not parameters.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get a prompt by name' and mentions optional arguments. It distinguishes from siblings implicitly (e.g., get_doc retrieves documents, list_prompts lists all prompts), but does not explicitly differentiate.

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?

Implied usage for retrieving a specific prompt by name, but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_prompts or other get_ tools. No exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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