get_spread_info

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior but only states it 'gets' information. It does not mention side effects, permissions, performance implications, or whether the operation is read-only. The term 'get' implies a safe read, but explicit confirmation is missing.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. Efficiently communicates the essential function.

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 zero annotations, no output schema, and a single parameter, the description is adequate for a simple getter. However, it lacks detail on what 'detailed information' includes, which could cause confusion with sibling tools. It is minimally sufficient.

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 100% with one parameter ('spreadIndex') already described as a 0-based index. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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') and resource ('detailed information about a specific spread'). While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_spread_content_summary' or 'list_spreads', the name and context imply distinct focus on full detail for a single spread.

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 'get_spread_content_summary' or 'list_spreads'. The description lacks prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name.

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