provider-get-item-by-path

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'Gets' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether this is a read-only operation (likely, but not confirmed), if it requires specific permissions, what happens on invalid paths (e.g., errors or null returns), or any rate limits. The description is minimal and lacks necessary context for safe and effective use.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste—'Gets a Sitecore item by its path.' It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for its purpose, making it easy to parse without unnecessary elaboration.

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 complexity of a 4-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'gets' returns (e.g., item data, fields, or a reference), behavioral aspects like error handling, or how it differs from sibling tools. For a retrieval tool in a rich ecosystem, this leaves significant gaps for an AI agent.

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%, so the schema fully documents all 4 parameters (path, database, language, version) with clear descriptions. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying path-based retrieval, which is already covered by the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as 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 'Gets a Sitecore item by its path' clearly states the verb ('Gets') and resource ('Sitecore item'), but it's vague about what 'gets' entails (e.g., retrieves metadata, content, or full object) and doesn't distinguish from many sibling tools like 'provider-get-item-by-id' or 'item-service-get-item-by-path', which likely serve similar purposes. It's adequate but lacks specificity.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'provider-get-item-by-id' (for ID-based retrieval) or 'item-service-get-item-by-path' (which appears similar). The description implies usage for path-based retrieval but offers no explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess based on tool names alone.

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