telys_get

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

Annotations already mark the tool read-only and idempotent, and the description adds meaningful behavioral detail: unknown ids return found:false rather than an error, failures occur only for missing collections, and repo-indexed rows trigger a re-read from disk. This goes well beyond the 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?

The description is front-loaded with the core behavior and then efficiently covers edge cases, defaults, and failure semantics. Every clause adds operational value; there is no repetition of obvious schema facts or filler.

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 lack of an output schema, the description supplies the essential contract: per-id results, found flag, metadata, optional source text, and failure behavior. It also mentions the disk re-read path, which is important operational context for repo-indexed rows.

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 low (25%), but the description compensates by naming required parameters, noting defaults, and explaining with_text's repo-index behavior. It also connects 'ids' to external ids and with_metadata to stored metadata, though the exact effect of with_metadata=false remains somewhat implied.

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 precise operation ('Exact row lookup by external id'), names the return concept ('found flag plus stored metadata'), and explicitly contrasts itself with similarity search. It also references the repo-search hit workflow, making its role distinct among many siblings.

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?

It gives explicit use cases: 'Use to fetch known rows or read the code behind a telys_repo_search hit.' It also states a clear exclusion ('no similarity search') and clarifies error behavior, so an agent can decide when this tool is appropriate.

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