get_queue

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that — no note on lookup failure when a key/id doesn't match, no indication of what the 'parameters' payload contains.

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?

A single short sentence with no filler and the key lookup modes front-loaded. It is appropriately brief, though it is brief to the point of under-specification rather than being an efficiently dense definition.

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?

With one required parameter, a read-only annotation, and no output schema, the description is minimally viable, but 'queue parameters' leaves the return content undefined and the tool's place among many get_queue_* siblings unclear.

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 description coverage is 100% and the schema already documents 'Queue key (case-sensitive) or id'. The description's 'by key or id' merely restates the schema, adding no format, case-sensitivity, or precedence guidance beyond it.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'queue' are present, but 'queue parameters' is ambiguous about what is actually returned (settings? configuration? metadata?). Among dozens of get_queue_* siblings, nothing here distinguishes it from get_queue_fields, get_queue_versions, or get_queues.

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?

No statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_queues (list) or the more specific get_queue_fields/get_queue_versions. No prerequisites or context given; the agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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