Get a filter control

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds little behavioral context beyond confirming that it reads community data, but it does not contradict the annotations and provides a minimum of useful scoping information.

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 very short and front-loaded with the core action. However, the first sentence largely repeats the tool title and name, so it earns less than a maximally efficient definition would.

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 two-parameter read tool with rich annotations and full schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate. It omits when-to-use guidance and any indication of the returned filter control, though no output schema exists to cover return semantics.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all parameter meaning is already documented in the input schema. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline score of 3 appropriate.

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 states a clear verb+resource ('Get a filter control') and adds a data-scope note ('Reads community data'). It is specific enough to identify the operation, but it does not explicitly differentiate this tool from siblings like get_filter_configuration or list_filter_controls.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_filter_controls, get_filter_configuration, or update_filter_control. The only usage-like phrase, 'Reads community data,' indicates the data domain but not selection criteria.

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