get_global_source_element

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

With no annotations provided, the description must convey behavioral traits. It discloses what the response contains, but it does not explicitly confirm the operation is read-only, mention error conditions, or note any side effects. The verb 'Get' implies read-only, and the list of returned attributes adds value, but the absence of explicit safety statements leaves a gap.

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 a single, focused sentence that front-loads the core purpose and lists key content categories without extraneous words. It is concise and well-structured.

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 no output schema, the description effectively summarizes the return content by listing the element's attributes. It is sufficient for a simple get tool with three parameters, though it could be more explicit about return structure or error behavior. Overall, it covers the essential 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 input schema describes all three parameters with meaningful descriptions (e.g., 'Element ID (e.g. TEXT-3)', 'Global source ID'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves full detail of a single element and enumerates the included attributes (style, config, specials, events, bindings, responsive, children). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_global_source_elements (search vs. full detail) and get_global_source_detail (source-level detail).

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 implies usage when full element details are needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_global_source_elements or get_global_section_element. No exclusions or alternative guidance is provided.

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