classIncludes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention that the tool is read-only, any side effects, authentication requirements, or what the output represents. The word 'Get' implies retrieval, but no explicit confirmation.

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 a single sentence, concise and front-loaded with the verb. It wastes no words, but may be too terse for full clarity.

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 simplicity of the tool (one required parameter, no output schema), the description should ideally explain the return structure or provide more context. It does not address what the agent will receive, nor does it elaborate on the 'includes' concept.

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% coverage with descriptions for both 'clas' and 'connection'. However, the tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. It does not explain the parameters or how they affect the behavior.

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 states 'Get class includes structure' which specifies a verb and resource, but 'class includes structure' is somewhat vague and could be more explicit. It distinguishes from siblings like 'classComponents' but lacks clarity on what 'includes' means.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'classComponents' or 'objectStructure'. There is no mention of prerequisites, when-not to use, or context.

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