afl_venue_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states the operation is 'Get', implying read-only, but does not disclose side effects, permissions, rate limits, or error behavior. The return structure adds some transparency but the description could be more explicit about behavioral traits.

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 with two sentences: one for the action and one for the return format. There is no redundant information, and every sentence adds value. It is well-structured and easy to parse.

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-by-id tool with one parameter, the description is nearly complete. It shows the return structure and clarifies the intent. However, it lacks information on error handling (e.g., behavior when venueId not found) and does not mention any authentication requirements, which are not covered by annotations (none provided).

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 single parameter 'venueId' is not described in the schema (0% coverage) and the description adds no explanation about its format, source, or valid values. The description does not compensate for the missing schema descriptions, leaving the agent without helpful context for constructing the parameter.

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 a single venue by id', specifying the verb and resource, and distinguishes from the sibling tool 'afl_venues_list' which would list venues. The return structure is also provided, reinforcing the purpose.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'afl_venues_list'. The description does not indicate prerequisites, context for use, or when not to use it. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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