get_tender_details

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only says 'Get detailed information' without noting that it is a read-only operation, whether any permissions are needed, or how the output is structured. No side effects or constraints are mentioned.

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 concise sentence with no wasted words, but it is also too sparse to be genuinely helpful. It is not verbose, yet it lacks the substantive content needed for effective guidance.

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 four parameters, two required, and no output schema. Without annotations, the description should explain what kind of details are returned, how the two IDs interact, and any other relevant context. The current description is insufficient for an agent to call the tool correctly with confidence.

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 input schema provides descriptions for all four parameters (100% coverage), including the UUID format and the language/raw options. The description itself adds no further meaning, but since the schema covers everything, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a clear action ('Get detailed information') on a specific resource ('a specific tender'). It distinguishes from search tools but not from the closely related sibling get_publication_history. It is more specific than a tautology but lacks detail on what 'details' entails.

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 such as get_publication_history or search_tenders. The description does not mention required identifiers or any context that would help an agent choose it appropriately.

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