spss_get_method_schema

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 strongly implies a read-only introspection action ('Get the JSON schema', 'before execution'), but it does not explicitly state that the method is not executed, what happens for invalid tool names, or whether the method must already exist in the registry.

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 concise sentences with no redundancy. The action and resource are front-loaded, and the usage context follows directly. Every word 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?

For a simple one-parameter schema-retrieval tool with an output schema, the description covers the purpose and usage adequately. However, it omits parameter semantics and does not mention how to discover valid method names, leaving an obvious gap for an agent preparing to call it.

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 0%, and the description does not explicitly explain that tool_name is the SPSS method name or how valid values can be discovered. An agent can infer the meaning from context, but the description should have pointed to spss_list_supported_methods for valid tool names.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('JSON schema for a registry-backed SPSS method'), making the tool's purpose clear. It is implicitly distinct from siblings like spss_get_method_support, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself by naming alternatives.

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 second sentence provides explicit usage context: 'useful for structured orchestration and parameter inspection before execution.' This tells an agent when to use it, though it does not mention when not to use it or name alternative tools.

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