get_element_by_id

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'get' implies a read operation, but doesn't specify what 'basic element info' includes (e.g., properties, attributes), whether it requires an active connection, or any error handling. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Get basic element info by ID') with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple lookup tool.

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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'basic element info' entails in the return value, nor does it cover behavioral aspects like prerequisites or error cases. For a tool in a complex environment with many siblings, this leaves too much undefined.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with the 'id' parameter clearly documented as 'Element ID'. The description adds no additional semantic context beyond implying it's used for retrieval, so it meets the baseline of 3 where the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Get basic element info by ID' clearly states the action (get) and target (element info by ID), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from similar tools like 'get_element_source' or 'get_elements_by_renderer', which also retrieve element-related information but with different scopes or criteria.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'get_element_source' (for source code) and 'get_elements_by_renderer' (for multiple elements), there's no indication that this tool is specifically for 'basic info' by ID, leaving the agent to guess based on tool names alone.

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