brc_get_accrual

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the tool returns information (implying a non-destructive read) and clarifies that child accruals are not exposed. However, it omits details like idempotency, potential error conditions, or any response format hints.

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 extremely concise: two sentences, no fluff, and front-loaded with the core function. Every word contributes meaning.

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 has no output schema, yet the description does not hint at what information is returned (e.g., structure, fields). It also lacks any mention of authentication, error handling, or prerequisites, leaving gaps for an agent to understand the full context.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, confirming the id is for a parent accrual. The tool's note about parent vs child is more about purpose than parameter semantics.

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 information about a single parent Accrual by ID, distinguishing it from sibling tools like brc_list_accruals (for listing) and brc_create_accrual (for creation). It also notes that child accruals are not exposed, providing additional specificity.

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 defines the tool's use case—retrieving a specific parent accrual by ID—and the context of sibling tools suggests alternative tools for listing or creating. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list prerequisites.

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