get_picklist_options

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It adds real value by disclosing the return structure (no output schema exists) and the subtle caveat that matching values alone don't prove a Global OptionSet binding, but it omits permissions, error behavior, and what happens on ambiguous local/global inputs.

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?

Front-loads the verb and return shape, then adds the interpretive caveat in a tight second sentence. Dense but every sentence earns its place; no filler.

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?

Since there is no output schema, the description correctly compensates by spelling out the response shape and the meaning of is_global. Given no annotations, it could say more about read-only safety, but nothing essential for calling the tool is missing.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description goes beyond it by clarifying the local-vs-global distinction behind the two parameter groups (option_set_name vs entity/attribute pair) and naming the attribute types the third parameter applies to.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Read a Local or Global OptionSet') and even gives the exact return shape, so the operation is unambiguous. It does not explicitly name its sibling mutations (add/update/delete_picklist_option), but 'Read' distinguishes it well enough in context.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to alternatives such as get_entity_schema or get_attribute_dependencies. The only implied scope is 'Works for Choice, Status, State and MultiSelect columns', which describes applicability rather than selection criteria.

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