marketplace_get_specific_charge

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds no extra behavioral context such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens if the charge ID is invalid. With annotations present, the description's minimalism is acceptable but does not exceed the baseline.

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?

Description is a single short phrase, 'Get specific wallet charge details', which is concise and front-loaded. Every word is necessary; no filler or redundant content. For a simple get-by-ID operation, this is appropriately sized.

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 the tool's simplicity (single required parameter, read-only, no output schema), the description is largely complete. An agent can infer it returns the details of a specific wallet charge. However, it does not explicitly mention what 'details' includes or any potential error conditions, but for a straightforward retrieval this is minor.

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% — the only parameter 'chargeId' has a description 'ID of the charge to retrieve'. The tool description does not add any extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Since the schema does the heavy lifting, a baseline 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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'specific wallet charge details', unambiguously indicating a single-charge retrieval. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling marketplace_get_charges which suggests listing all charges. The name and description align well.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like marketplace_get_charges or marketplace_charge. Does not specify any prerequisites or mention that this is for a specific charge by ID, though the parameter hints at that. Lacks exclusions or alternate routes.

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