Get map array element

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavior. It clarifies this is a read operation (non-destructive) and scopes it to map-level ACS arrays. However, it does not disclose error handling (e.g., out-of-range index), return format, or behavior for missing arrays, which are left unspecified.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the action and key parameters. No unnecessary words or clutter.

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 read tool, it gives the core purpose but lacks parameter details (instance) and return behavior. With no output schema or annotations, the description is minimally adequate but leaves some 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explicitly mentions 'name' and 'index', covering two of three parameters, but does not explain 'instance' or any parameter semantics beyond what the schema names. This is partial compensation.

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 uses a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('map-scope ACS array element') and clearly identifies the parameters ('by name and index'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_acs_var (likely scalar) and set_map_array (write operation).

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 usage for reading a single array element but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as get_acs_var or list_acs_vars. There are no exclusions or when-not-to-use instructions, but the purpose is fairly clear from the wording.

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