get_strings

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It only says 'Retrieve contents,' which implies a read operation, but gives no details about pagination, permissions, or return format. The presence of offset and count suggests pagination, but this is not disclosed.

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, which is concise but incomplete. It sacrifices necessary detail for brevity, making it minimally helpful rather than efficient.

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 an output schema exists and may document return values, the description lacks essential details about parameters (offset and count). For a simple tool with two parameters, the description is insufficient for correct 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%, so the description must explain parameters, but it does not mention offset or count at all. The agent has no insight into what these parameters do, despite defaults being provided.

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 'Retrieve contents of strings.xml files,' identifying the verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like get_resource_file, which could retrieve the same file, so it lacks distinctiveness.

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_resource_file or get_all_resource_file_names. There is no mention of when to set offset or count parameters, leaving the agent to infer usage without context.

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