get_collection

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond that by disclosing that the response is paginated ('one page of its ROMs') and how to advance ('Follow roms.next_offset'), which the annotations do not convey.

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?

Two short sentences with zero waste, pagination guidance front-loaded second. Every clause earns its place and nothing is padded.

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 a rich annotation set and an existing output schema, the description appropriately defers return-shape details and instead explains pagination mechanics via roms.next_offset. It is nearly complete for this tool, with only the parameter semantics gap preventing a 5.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it only alludes to pagination via 'one page' and 'next_offset'. It never mentions the limit, offset, or collection_id parameters, leaving their semantics entirely to the schema.

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?

States a specific verb+resource pair ('Get a regular collection and one page of its ROMs'), which is clear and distinguishes the tool from the list_collections sibling by implying single-item retrieval. It also scopes the return to 'one page of its ROMs', but does not explicitly name the sibling it contrasts with.

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 phrase 'Follow roms.next_offset' gives concrete pagination guidance for iterating, which is a real usage hint. However, there is no explicit statement of when to use this versus list_collections or search_roms, leaving usage only partially implied.

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