get_flag_type

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. The verb 'Get' indicates a read-only operation, but it does not disclose error behaviors (e.g., 404 for unknown ID), permission requirements, or return format. It is minimally transparent but not misleading.

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 a single concise sentence with every word earning its place. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, and there is zero waste or redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple (one required parameter, no output schema, no annotations). The description covers the core function and parameter, but leaves out response details, error scenarios, and any special behavioral context. For a simple getter, this is minimally viable but not a fully rich description.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does by explicitly stating 'by ID', which clarifies that the 'id' parameter is the unique identifier of the Flag Type. This adds meaning beyond the raw schema, though it doesn't explain values or edge cases. For a single-parameter tool, this is sufficient.

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 'Get a specific Flag Type by ID' clearly states the verb (Get), the resource (Flag Type), and the scope (by ID). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like list_flag_types (for listing) and get_flag (a different resource). This is a precise and specific purpose.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The phrase 'specific... by ID' implies use when the agent has one known ID and needs that Flag Type's data, but it does not contrast with alternatives like list_flag_types or explain prerequisites. Usage is only implied.

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