get_global_source_detail

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the exact line format of the returned tree, including ID, type, text, class, events, bindings, and children_count, which gives the agent concrete expectations. It also mentions the performance behavior ('faster lookup') for the optional parameter.

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 sentence for purpose, one for output format, and one for usage hint. Every part carries actionable information with no fluff, and the front-loaded 'Get full detail' immediately clarifies the operation.

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 there is no output schema, the description fully specifies the return format and how to use the optional parameter. For a read-only detail tool, this is complete: it tells the agent what to expect (the tree lines) and how to optimize lookup, with no missing critical context.

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 already provides descriptions for both parameters (100% coverage). The description adds extra semantic value by explaining when 'component' should be omitted (if list_global_sources was already called) and reinforcing its role as a lookup hint, which goes beyond the schema text.

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 a specific verb 'Get' with a clear resource ('full detail of a global source') and specifies the output as 'compact tree view showing all elements'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_global_source_element or get_global_source_contents.

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?

The description gives practical guidance on the 'component' parameter ('Provide component for faster lookup; omit if you already called list_global_sources'), implying when to use the tool effectively. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative retrieval tools, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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