fx_get_params

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool automatically filters out junk params, but does not state it is a read-only operation, potential side effects, or behavior on error. The output format is hinted but not detailed.

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 concise with four sentences: purpose, filtering behavior, and two parameter definitions. No redundant text, and key information is front-loaded.

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 and no annotations, the description covers purpose, filtering, and parameter semantics. However, it lacks explicit mention of read-only safety, return format details, and potential edge cases, leaving gaps for a complete understanding.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description compensates by defining both parameters as 0-based indices. This adds meaning beyond the schema's type/required info, though it could include constraints or examples.

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 action ('Get all parameters') and the resource ('FX plugin'), and specifies the output includes 'names, values, formatted display'. It is distinct from sibling tools like fx_set_param or fx_get_preset.

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 through the filtering note, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. No mention of prerequisites or comparison with other getters.

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