get_element

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description goes beyond that by disclosing the shape and intent of what it returns (an authoritative default skeleton you can copy and edit, plus meaningful config keys and allowed values), which materially helps the agent use the result.

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?

Two front-loaded sentences with no filler: the first lists the return contents, the second states the usage rule. Slightly dense parenthetical enumeration, but every clause earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does it well by naming the constituent parts (category, container flag, ATTRIBUTES, skeleton node). It is nearly complete for a single-param reference lookup; only minor details like pagination or size limits are absent, which are unlikely to matter here.

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 100% and the single 'type' parameter is documented with examples ('text', 'button', 'grid-product'). The description reinforces 'element type' but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Get the full detail of an element type') and enumerates exactly what is returned: category, container flag, summary, ATTRIBUTES reference, and a live skeleton node. This clearly distinguishes it from list_elements (enumeration) and get_page_element (an instance on a page).

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when to use it: 'Read this before authoring/editing an element so you set the right keys.' That is a clear usage context, though it does not name an alternative tool or state exclusions.

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