get_service_desk

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states it gets details, but does not mention that it is read-only, what happens if ID is invalid, or any required permissions. Minimal behavioral context beyond the action itself.

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?

Extremely concise: one main sentence plus a docstring-style args section. Every sentence provides value, front-loaded with the core action. No superfluous information.

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 is simple (1 param, no nested objects) and has an output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, prerequisite, and parameter meaning. It could mention return type or error handling, but the output schema likely covers return values, making it sufficiently complete.

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 0%, but the description adds 'The numeric ID of the service desk (e.g. '1')', clarifying the expected format (numeric string) with an example. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's type string alone.

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 'Get details of a specific service desk by its numeric ID', providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from list_service_desks by referencing it to find the ID, but doesn't explicitly distinguish from get_service_desk_info, leaving slight ambiguity with sibling tools.

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 advises using list_service_desks first to find the ID, giving clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not mention when not to use it or provide explicit alternatives among siblings.

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