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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions 'Auth required,' which is a minimal requirement, but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, what happens if the delegation is not found, or any other side effects or constraints. This is insufficient for a tool without annotation support.

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 exceptionally concise, consisting of two short sentences: 'Fetch one delegation. Auth required.' Every word serves a purpose, and the main intent is front-loaded immediately. No redundancy or fluff.

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 getter with one parameter and no output schema, the description is somewhat complete but lacks details on the return value or error behavior. It does not mention what the response contains (e.g., full delegation object) or how failures are handled, which could be useful in the absence of an output schema. The description meets minimal viability but has gaps.

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 fully documents the only parameter 'id' with 100% coverage, so the description adds no additional information about parameters. The description does not elaborate on the format or usage of the id beyond what the schema already states, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Fetch one delegation' using a specific verb (fetch) and resource (delegation), and the qualifier 'one' distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'list_delegations' which fetches multiple. Purpose is unambiguous and distinct from other delegation-related 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?

The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_delegations or other delegation tools. However, the presence of a required 'id' parameter implies usage for retrieving a specific delegation by identifier, so usage is implied but not explicitly discussed.

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