spine_get_document_summary

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

The description does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only, and there are no annotations provided. However, the nature of 'get_document_summary' implies no destructive behavior. It could be improved by confirming no side effects.

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 that efficiently lists the output components. It could benefit from structured formatting but is not verbose.

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?

While the description lists the outputs, it omits details about the return format, error conditions, and confirmation of read-only behavior. Given the absence of an output schema, more detail would be beneficial.

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 single parameter filePath is already well-described in the schema. The tool description adds no further detail about its format or constraints beyond what the schema provides.

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 returns Spine JSON version, file hash, top-level fields, counts, and V1 write permission, making its purpose specific and distinct from sibling tools that focus on animations, skins, etc.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like spine_get_animations or spine_validate_json. The agent receives no context about appropriate use cases or prerequisites.

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