describe_gp_tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves documentation, implying a read-only operation, but does not explicitly confirm safety, non-destructiveness, or any side effects. Important traits like authentication needs or rate limits are omitted.

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, focused sentence with no superfluous words. It directly conveys the tool's purpose without redundancy.

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 that an output schema exists, the description is not required to detail return values. However, the description is minimal and does not explain the scope of 'full documentation' or how the output is structured. It is adequate but could be more complete, especially given the single required parameter.

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?

There is one required parameter ('tool') with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not explain what the parameter represents (e.g., tool name) or provide any value constraints. This leaves the agent with no semantic guidance for populating the parameter.

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 tool retrieves syntax and full documentation for a geoprocessing tool. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('syntax and full documentation'), and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'run_gp_tool' (execution) and 'search_gp_tools' (searching).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, when-not-to-use scenarios, or contrast with sibling tools like 'run_gp_tool' or 'search_gp_tools'. Usage context is only implied.

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