fsnb_rate_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'get norm by code' without mentioning required permissions, error behavior (e.g., not found), response format, or side effects. This is insufficient.

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 very concise (one sentence) and front-loaded with the action. However, the parentheses add format examples, which are helpful. No waste, but could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet format examples).

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains how to invoke the tool but leaves uncertainty about what a 'norm' contains or how errors manifest. Complete enough for basic use but lacks output context.

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 description repeats the code format example already present in the schema. It adds minimal extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 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 tool retrieves a GESN norm by code, with a specific format example. It distinguishes from siblings implicitly (fsnb_search searches, fsnb_validate_code validates), but could be more explicit about its unique role.

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?

Usage is implied: you need a norm code. However, no explicit guidance on when to use this over siblings (e.g., fsnb_search) or conditions (e.g., code must be valid). Lacks when-not or alternatives.

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