get_manifest

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states it returns contents, implying a read operation, but does not explicitly disclose behavioral traits like auth requirements or side effects. It provides adequate but not detailed transparency.

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 two sentences, with the first defining the tool's output and the second providing usage guidance. No unnecessary words, perfectly concise.

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 has no output schema, the description adequately lists what it returns (shipments, total weight, shipment count). It is complete for a simple retrieval tool with only one parameter.

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 100% with a clear description of the manifest_id parameter. The description adds context by mentioning that manifest IDs come from list_manifests, providing marginal additional value beyond 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 clearly states the tool returns the contents of one manifest including shipments, total weight, and shipment count. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_manifests by specifying that it is used after that to see details of a specific load.

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 explicitly says to use after list_manifests to see what is on a specific load, providing clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives beyond list_manifests.

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