get_sticker_set

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

Annotations already indicate a safe read-only, idempotent operation. The description adds value by specifying the return payload: set metadata plus first 10 stickers with id and emoji, which goes beyond the annotations. No contradictory behavior is disclosed.

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 two sentences: the first states exactly what the tool does and the parameter format, the second details the return structure. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 simple single-parameter getter with an output schema, the description is adequately complete. It explains the input, gives an example, and summarizes the return. No critical missing context (e.g., error cases or pagination) for expected usage.

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 has one parameter short_name with no description, so the description carries the burden. It clarifies that short_name is the sticker set identifier and provides a concrete example, effectively compensating for the 0% schema coverage.

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 states a clear verb 'get' and resource 'sticker set' with the identifying parameter short_name, e.g., 'AnimatedEmojies'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_sticker_sets by specifying direct retrieval by short_name.

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 have a short_name and need the sticker set, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like search_sticker_sets or get_installed_stickers. Usage context is implied rather than stated.

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