isw_fetch_data_prep_request

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

With no annotations, the description must reveal behavioral traits. It only states 'Fetch', implying a read operation, but does not disclose side effects, authorization requirements, rate limits, or error handling.

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 sentence, which is concise but under-specified. It could be improved by adding brief context without becoming verbose.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description omits crucial details like return structure, prerequisites, and relationship to sibling tools. An agent cannot fully understand usage from this alone.

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%. The description does not explain the 'extra' object parameter or the format of 'requestRef'. This leaves the agent without necessary semantic information.

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 verb 'Fetch' and resource 'Card 360 data prep request' with identifier 'requestRef'. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'isw_fetch_prepared_cards', leaving ambiguity about the specific resource type.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks context on prerequisites, typical scenarios, or exclusions.

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