dataverse_get_plugin_step

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. The description adds behavioral context by describing the prerequisite chain (assembly → type → step → image), which is useful for understanding operational constraints. It does not contradict 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 extremely concise: two sentences with a front-loaded purpose. The first sentence states the core function, and the second provides essential context (hierarchy). 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?

The tool has a clear purpose, annotations cover safety, output schema exists, and the description adds the hierarchical context. However, it could mention expected behavior when the GUID is not found (e.g., returns null or error) or any special handling. Still, given low complexity, it is fairly complete.

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 provides clear descriptions for each parameter (step_id, dataverse_url, select). The tool description does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema. Given that schema descriptions are comprehensive, the description adds minimal value for parameters.

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 verb 'Retrieve', specifies the resource 'single SDK message processing step record', and identifies the identifier 'GUID'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like dataverse_list_plugin_steps by targeting a single record. The hierarchy note further clarifies the tool's place.

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 hierarchical context (assembly → type → step → image) implying that step requires prior assembly and type, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like dataverse_list_plugin_steps or other get_ tools. No when-not-to-use or alternative names are given.

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