get_queue

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It transparently discloses the default full-payload behavior and the field-selection option, which gives insight into performance trade-offs. However, it does not explicitly state read-only status, error behavior, or permissions, leaving some gaps for a tool with no annotation support.

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 concise: two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by a valuable tip. No wasted words or repetition of schema info.

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?

For a simple get tool with an output schema, the description is mostly sufficient, but given 0% schema coverage it could provide more context about the identifiers (e.g., how queue_id is scoped by account_id) or example usage. The field-selection tip adds value, but the overall guidance feels slightly under-specified for an agent encountering it cold.

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?

The description adds meaningful detail for the 'fields' parameter (comma-separated list, purpose) but gives no additional semantics for 'queue_id' or 'account_id' beyond their schema titles. Since schema coverage is 0%, the description partially compensates but not fully for the required identifier parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('call queue'), clearly distinguishing this from sibling list_queues. It states exactly what the tool does: returns full details for a specific queue.

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?

It provides clear context for when to use the fields parameter ('when checking several queues in a row') and implies the tool is for retrieving a single queue. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, but the usage context is well implied.

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