vw_get_record

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds genuine behavioral context by disclosing that a plug-in object's parameters can be retrieved by passing the plug-in name as the record, which the annotations do not convey. It says nothing about missing-record behavior or error handling.

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 efficient sentence with no filler. The plug-in clarification is somewhat parenthetically buried rather than front-loaded, but nothing is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, and annotations cover the read-only safety profile. For a simple two-parameter getter, the description plus structured fields are sufficient, with only minor gaps around parameter formatting and failure modes.

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 0%, so the description must carry the parameter burden. It explains the 'record' argument can be either a record name or a plug-in name, which is valuable, but leaves 'uuid' undefined beyond the obvious and gives no format expectations.

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 specific resource (all field values of a record) and scopes it to an object UUID, distinguishing it from the sibling vw_set_record by implication of retrieval. It is phrased as a noun clause rather than a verb, but the intent is 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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of the complementary vw_set_record, and no statement of prerequisites. The only actionable hint is that a plug-in name may be passed as the record argument, which is inferable but not framed as usage guidance.

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