openclaw_exec_approval_get

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

Explicitly states 'Read-only' and 'Wraps exec.approval.get' indicating no destructive side effects. Lacks detail on error handling, authentication, or rate limits, but adequate for a simple read operation without annotations.

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 sentences: first states purpose and output fields, second notes wrapper and read-only nature. No redundancy, every sentence adds value.

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?

Covers purpose, output fields, safety, and wrapper. Lacks output schema or error behavior, but acceptable for a simple get with two parameters. Minor gap on response format if not found.

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 100%, baseline 3. Description adds context by listing response fields, but does not provide additional parameter semantics beyond schema descriptions.

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?

Clear specific verb 'Get' and resource 'exec approval request'. Lists returned fields (command, args, agent, status). Distinguishes from siblings like list/request/resolve. Explicit 'Read-only' and wrapper reference add clarity.

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?

Implied usage: for getting a single request. No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use. Does not differentiate from sibling tools like openclaw_exec_approval_list or openclaw_exec_approvals_get. Lacks explicit guidance.

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