Get Shared Schema

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

With no readOnlyHint or destructiveHint annotations, the description must carry behavioral context. It discloses return content (full JSON Schema and rowVersion), the project-only limitation of includeUsedBy, and a deletion-workflow warning. It doesn't state error behavior in org scope, but the key caveats are present.

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?

Three short sentences with no filler: the core action is front-loaded, then scope and includeUsedBy add the only necessary caveats. Every sentence 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 single-record GET with three documented parameters, the description covers the returned data, scope semantics, and the important includeUsedBy restriction. No output schema exists, but the description supplies the essential return information.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining that includeUsedBy lists the specs linking a schema and should be used before deletion, which clarifies the parameter's real-world purpose.

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 and resource: 'Get one shared schema with its full JSON Schema and rowVersion.' It names the object and the scope options, distinguishing this single-item retrieval from siblings like list_shared_schemas without needing to open the schema.

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?

It gives concrete usage context: which scope to choose, that includeUsedBy should be set before deleting a schema, and that includeUsedBy works only in project scope. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use the tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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