signavio_get_model

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 states 'Get model metadata by ID' but doesn't clarify what 'metadata' includes, whether authentication is required (implied by sibling 'signavio_authenticate'), or any rate limits or error conditions. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that likely interacts with an external API.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste: 'Get model metadata by ID'. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool, earning full marks for conciseness.

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 the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'metadata' entails (e.g., fields returned), authentication requirements, or error handling. For a tool in a suite with authentication and complex operations, this minimal description leaves too much unspecified for reliable agent use.

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 has 100% description coverage, with 'modelId' clearly documented as 'The model ID'. The description adds no additional parameter details beyond this, so it meets the baseline of 3 where the schema does the heavy lifting, but doesn't compensate with extra context like format examples or constraints.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'model metadata by ID', making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from similar siblings like 'signavio_get_model_revisions' or 'signavio_get_folder_contents', which also retrieve metadata but for different resources.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'signavio_search' or 'signavio_get_model_revisions', there's no indication of when this specific metadata retrieval is preferred, leaving the agent to guess based on context alone.

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