cml_get_aggregate

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone must convey behavioral traits. It states the tool returns detailed information including entities, value objects, events, and commands, but omits details such as idempotency, error behavior (e.g., if aggregate doesn't exist), or any side effects. This leaves behavioral gaps.

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, well-structured sentence of 14 words, delivering the core purpose without redundancy. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 the tool has two well-described parameters and no output schema, the description adequately states what information is returned. However, it lacks details about response structure or format, which is a minor gap. Overall, it is minimally complete for a read operation.

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 covers both parameters with clear descriptions (contextName: 'Name of the bounded context', aggregateName: 'Name of the aggregate'). Schema description coverage is 100%, so the tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is 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 clearly states the tool retrieves detailed information about an aggregate, listing specific components (entities, value objects, events, commands). It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('aggregate'), and distinguishes from siblings like cml_list_aggregates (which lists aggregates) and cml_get_bounded_context (which gets context info).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus its alternatives (e.g., cml_list_aggregates for summaries, cml_get_bounded_context for context details). The description provides no context about prerequisites or typical usage scenarios.

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