subclass_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently states that the tool returns 'the complete entry with description merged in,' clarifying the output behavior. It does not mention failure modes or disambiguation caveats, but for a simple read-only retrieval this is reasonable coverage.

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?

Two sentences with no filler: the first states the operation and output, the second gives routing guidance. Every sentence earns its place and the key information is front-loaded.

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 exact-name retrieval tool, the description is complete: it defines the input condition (exact name), the return behavior (complete entry with merged description), and the alternative when the condition is not met (subclass_search). The schema covers the remaining parameter details.

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% and every parameter already has a descriptive meaning, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add further semantic detail about parameters like source or ruleset beyond what the schema already 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get a specific D&D 5e subclass or archetype by exact name.' It also distinguishes itself from the sibling subclass_search by explicitly noting the exact-name requirement, so an agent can clearly tell the two apart.

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 gives explicit routing guidance: 'Prefer this over subclass_search when you have an exact name.' This directly tells the agent when to use this tool versus its main alternative, leaving no ambiguity.

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