get_evidence_schema

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

No annotations provided. Description is straightforward but lacks disclosure of potential caching, schema versioning behavior, or any side effects. It adequately describes a read-only retrieval without additional behavioral context.

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?

Single concise sentence that is front-loaded with the main action and includes all necessary information without any superfluous 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?

For a simple parameterless tool with no output schema, the description fully covers its purpose and content. It is complete given the low complexity.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters (100% coverage). Description adds meaning by detailing what the returned schema contains (node types, edge types, query properties), which is helpful beyond the schema definition.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'versioned schema' with specific content details (graph node types, edge types, query properties). It distinguishes from sibling tools like query_evidence_graph and structural_search by focusing on schema definition.

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 explicit usage guidance or exclusions. However, context from sibling names (e.g., query_evidence_graph) implies this is a prerequisite for querying the graph, but no direct statement.

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