wavexis_cookie_get

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

Annotations already signal readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description reinforces this with 'Side effects: None; reads cookie state' and adds useful behavioral detail about the return shape (status and cookie keys). No annotation contradictions are present.

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 and front-loaded: purpose first, usage routing second, then side effects and return format. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundant or filler phrase.

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 simple read-only cookie getter, the description explains behavior, return shape, and sibling routing. The only notable gap is the lack of explicit mention that a valid session_id is required, but the schema covers this, so the context remains sufficient 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?

The schema already includes helpful descriptions for name, path, domain, and session_id. The description only adds a high-level notion of optional domain/path filtering and does not explain the required session_id dependency. It is adequate but does not meaningfully improve on the schema's parameter documentation.

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 uses a specific verb 'Retrieve' with a concrete resource ('a single cookie by name') and clearly defines the scope ('from the browser', optional domain/path). It also distinguishes this from wavexis_cookie_list, so an agent can tell them apart without opening the schemas.

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?

It explicitly states when to use a sibling tool instead: 'Use wavexis_cookie_list instead when you need multiple cookies or broad filtering.' This gives a clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use condition, leaving little to inference.

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