Pathauto Pattern Get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state that this is a safe read-only operation, what happens if the ID does not exist, or any permission requirements. Only the bare minimum is conveyed.

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?

A single short sentence that is front-loaded and free of waste. It is efficient, though the terseness contributes to the gaps noted in other dimensions rather than being a virtue in itself.

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?

This is a simple single-entity read tool and an output schema exists, so return values need not be described. However, with no annotations and 0% parameter coverage, the description leaves the 'include' parameter and read-safety profile wholly unexplained, which is a real gap even for a simple tool.

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% for both parameters. The phrase 'by ID' loosely maps to pattern_id, but the 'include' parameter (default empty string, no enum) is entirely unexplained in both schema and description, leaving half the input undocumented.

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?

States a specific verb (get) and resource (pathauto pattern) with a clear scope qualifier ('a single ... by ID'), which implicitly distinguishes it from pathauto_pattern_list. It does not explicitly name the sibling, but the singular/by-ID framing is unambiguous enough to route correctly.

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 when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives like pathauto_pattern_list, and no prerequisites or error conditions. The usage is only inferable from the tool name and the word 'single'.

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