Get catalog element

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description carries a lower burden. The description adds no extra behavioral context beyond the ID parameter, such as error behavior or return format, but for a simple read operation this is adequate. It does not contradict the annotations.

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 with no filler or redundant information. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity and immediately conveys the core operation.

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 tool's simplicity and the presence of readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, the description provides a basic understanding. However, it omits key context such as the meaning of the two parameters and any potential error cases or constraints, making it less complete for an agent that must invoke it correctly.

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 schema has two required integer parameters (id and catalog_id) with zero description coverage. The description only says 'by ID' without clarifying which parameter is which or how they relate. This leaves ambiguity about the role of each ID, failing to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 the tool's function with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('catalog element'), and adds the scope ('by ID'). This distinguishes it from catalog listing tools and other read operations, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 when you need a specific catalog element by ID, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., 'Use catalog_elements_list to browse all elements'). No exclusions or alternative suggestions are mentioned, so it falls between minimal guidance and an implied use case.

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