Get AM Script

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's confirmation of a read operation adds no new behavioral insight. The description mentions the return content but does not disclose additional traits like authentication needs, rate limits, or potential side effects. It does not contradict annotations.

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 two sentences: the first explains the core action, the second lists return fields. Every sentence adds value, and there is no wasted text.

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 get-by-id operation and the presence of annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), the description adequately covers return structure (name, description, language, source code) despite no output schema. It could mention error cases or prerequisites, but those are not essential for a basic retrieval.

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 both parameters well-described in the schema. The description only adds 'by its ID', which adds minimal meaning beyond the schema. The description does not need to compensate for low coverage, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Retrieve an AM script by its ID') and the resource ('AM script'). It lists the return fields (name, description, language, source code), distinguishing it from sibling tools like createScript, deleteScript, and updateScript.

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 the tool is for retrieving a single script by ID, but it does not explicitly compare to listScripts or other siblings. No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided, though the simple get-by-id pattern makes it somewhat clear.

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