get_msds

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

The description discloses a key behavioral trait: if no section is specified, it defaults to only sections 2, 8, and 15. It also provides semantic meaning for those sections. However, with no annotations provided, it does not mention output format, potential errors, or other side effects, so transparency is partial.

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 compact—two sentences—and front-loaded with the primary purpose. It efficiently packs in the section range, key section meanings, and the default behavior without unnecessary verbosity.

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?

For a tool with only two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential invocation logic: what sections are available, what the default is, and how to reference the chemical (via chemId from search_msds). A small gap is that it doesn't describe the return format, but that is not critical 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 coverage is only 50% (chemId is described, section is not). The description adds significant meaning to the 'section' parameter by listing the section numbers and their meanings, and specifying the default behavior. This compensates for the schema gap and provides actionable context.

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's function: 'MSDS 항목 본문 조회' (MSDS item body inquiry) with explicit scope (sections 1-16). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_msds by focusing on retrieving specific sections rather than searching for substances.

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 after a search (via chemId parameter being 'search_msds 결과의 chemId' in the schema), and the default behavior is described. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool compared to alternatives or provide exclusionary guidance, leaving room for ambiguity.

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