get_pattern_info

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

The verb 'Get' strongly implies a read-only operation and the description makes no claim of side effects. However, there are no annotations confirming safety, and the description does not explicitly state that the pattern is unmodified or mention any error/permission conditions. For a simple getter this is acceptable but not rich.

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 compact: one clear purpose sentence and one argument definition with no filler. It is front-loaded and easy to scan.

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 one-parameter getter, the description is minimally sufficient for invocation: the agent knows which argument to provide and that the result is pattern information. But with no output schema, 'detailed information' is vague, and the agent cannot know what fields will be returned until runtime.

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 schema only says 'pattern_index' is an integer, while the description adds the important semantic that it is a zero-based index of the pattern piece. This fully documents the single required parameter, though it omits bounds or out-of-range behavior.

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 uses 'Get detailed information about a specific pattern piece,' which clearly names the verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from list-oriented siblings like get_pattern_list and get_pattern_count, though it does not explicitly separate itself from other per-piece getters such as get_pattern_geometry.

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 get_pattern_geometry, get_pattern_bounding_box, or get_pattern_state. The description provides no context for choosing it over alternative information-retrieval tools.

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