get_namespace

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, it spells out non-mutation ('does not mutate GitLab data') and enumerates error scenarios: missing resources, invalid identifiers, insufficient permission, and rate limits. This gives the agent a good model of failure behavior, though some of it repeats the annotation.

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, but contains some boilerplate that is not relevant to this tool, especially the project_id/group_id/pagination sentence. It earns a middle score: no waste overall but not tightly tailored.

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 one-parameter read-only lookup with no output schema, this description covers purpose, target resource, error behavior, and usage context. It doesn't enumerate the returned namespace fields, but 'details' plus existing examples make this acceptable.

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 covers the only parameter 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds 'numeric ID or complete URL-encoded path', which is useful, but the generic mention of project_id/group_id and pagination fields is confusing since only namespace_id exists in the schema.

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 'Get details of a namespace (user or group) by ID or path', with a specific verb and resource, and clarifies that groups are namespaces with kind='group'. This distinguishes it from broad list/search tools.

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 says to use this tool for 'a known resource or result' and to choose the 'corresponding list or search tool' for discovery, giving clear when-to-use vs when-not-to-use guidance.

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