get_script

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It states that the tool returns script details including content, which is useful. However, it does not mention any permissions, rate limits, or side effects. Since it is a read operation, the description is minimally adequate.

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 extremely concise, with three short sections (purpose, args, returns). Every sentence serves a function, and the purpose is front-loaded. No unnecessary words.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown but confirmed), the description need not detail return values but still mentions 'details including content'. For a simple getter with two required parameters, the description is reasonably complete. It lacks details on permissions or error conditions, but that is acceptable for a read tool.

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?

The input schema has two parameters (adom, name) with no descriptions. The description adds 'ADOM name' and 'Script name', which only restates the property names without adding significant semantic detail. With schema coverage at 0%, the baseline is 3, and the description barely compensates.

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 clearly states 'Get details of a specific CLI script.' This uses a specific verb (get) and resource (CLI script), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_script, delete_script, and get_script_log_latest which deal with different aspects.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that list_scripts should be used to enumerate scripts, or that get_script_log_* tools are for logs. No when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria are provided.

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