get_chart_by_name

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

No annotations are provided. The description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as permissions, rate limits, or return format. It only states the basic function, leaving the agent without context on side effects or constraints.

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 sentence with no filler. However, given the lack of detail, it could be expanded without sacrificing conciseness. It is efficiently structured but marginally insufficient.

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 should provide more context about the tool's behavior, return value, and usage scenarios. It only covers the input method, leaving the agent with incomplete information for invocation.

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 0%. The description mentions 'fully qualified name' aligning with the required 'fqn' parameter, but does not explain the optional 'fields' parameter. The agent lacks guidance on how to use 'fields' to filter returned details.

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 'Get details of a specific chart by fully qualified name', which defines the verb (get), resource (chart), and method (by fully qualified name). It effectively distinguishes from sibling 'get_chart' (likely by ID) and 'list_charts'.

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 the fully qualified name is known, but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives like 'get_chart' or 'list_charts'. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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