archimate_get_valid_relationships

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

No annotations provided, and the description only states what the tool returns without disclosing behavioral traits such as read-only nature, permissions needed, or side effects. The description does not add context beyond the basic function.

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?

Single sentence that is clear and front-loaded with the main action. No wasted words, though it could be structured with more detail in a second sentence.

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?

The tool has low complexity with 2 simple parameters and no output schema. The description explains the purpose and mentions behavior when target_type is omitted. However, it lacks details about the return format or potential errors, relying on the schema.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond the schema. The optionality of target_type is mentioned, which matches the schema.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'valid relationship types', and the context 'between two element types'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like archimate_list_relationships and archimate_create_relationship.

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 for understanding permitted connections but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like archimate_list_relationships or archimate_create_relationship. No exclusions or alternative mentions.

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