get_instance_overrides

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It correctly identifies the tool as a read operation ('Get'), but lacks details on edge cases (e.g., missing nodeId, empty overrides) and does not confirm idempotency or side effects.

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 with zero redundancy. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose, and the second adds useful context about the output's application.

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 getter with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers basic usage but does not specify the return structure or handling of errors. It is functional but lacks completeness for an agent to handle all scenarios.

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?

The description adds value by explaining the nodeId parameter's optionality and fallback behavior ('currently selected instance'), which goes beyond the schema's description. This provides practical guidance for the agent.

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 clearly states the action ('Get') and the resource ('all override properties from a selected component instance'). It also explains the output's purpose ('can be applied to other instances'), distinguishing it clearly from the sibling set_instance_overrides.

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 need to retrieve overrides), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or error handling (e.g., what happens if no instance is selected or nodeId is invalid).

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