Get full details of a specific Zyla API by its numeric ID. Returns the API name, description, category, price per successful call (USD), average latency (ms), and all endpoints with their parameters, example values, and a formal JSON Schema (input_schema) for argument validation.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| api_id | Yes | The numeric API ID (e.g. 781) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Lists exactly what is returned (name, description, category, price, latency, endpoints, schema). No annotation coverage, but tool is read-only with no side effects; disclosure is adequate.
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?
Single sentence with clear structure: action, input, output. No redundant words. Every clause adds value.
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?
Given one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description fully explains what the tool does and what it returns. No 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?
Only one parameter 'api_id' with example and type already in schema. Description adds context that ID is numeric and ties to the information retrieval. Schema coverage is 100%.
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?
Clearly states the verb 'Get full details' and the resource 'specific Zyla API by its numeric ID'. Distinguishes from siblings like browse_catalog (listing) and call_api (execution).
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?
Implied use when needing full API details given an ID, but no explicit guidance on when to use versus search_catalog or browse_catalog, or prerequisites like obtaining the ID first.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose covering account management, catalog browsing, searching, API details, payment, and execution. No overlap in functionality.
All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (e.g., browse_catalog, get_api_info, list_categories), with register being the only single verb but still clear.
8 tools is well-scoped for an API hub, covering registration, account status, catalog exploration, payment setup, and API calling without unnecessary bloat.
Core workflows (register, browse, search, get info, call) are covered. Minor gap: no tool for usage history or API key regeneration, but not essential for primary use.
