get_fabric_for_pattern

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only 'get' operation, but does not mention return format, error behavior for invalid indices, or whether any side effects occur. The description is minimal and leaves these behaviors unspecified.

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 extremely concise: one clear declarative sentence followed by a single argument definition. It is front-loaded with the purpose and contains no redundant or extraneous text.

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 getter with one parameter, the description covers purpose and parameter semantics, but it omits the return value format (e.g., fabric ID or name) and any error conditions. Given the absence of annotations and output schema, these gaps leave the tool somewhat incomplete for an agent to use confidently.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so fully by explaining 'pattern_index' as a zero-based index of the pattern piece, adding critical meaning beyond the bare integer type in the schema. This single parameter is clearly and completely defined.

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, specific verb and resource: 'Get which fabric is assigned to a pattern piece.' This distinguishes it from write operations like assign_fabric_to_pattern and list operations like get_fabric_list, though it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention conditions, exclusions, or when to prefer get_fabric_info or get_fabric_list. The description simply states what it does without any usage context.

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