get_unit

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It notably discloses a data integrity guarantee ('Does not invent Anschrift or IBAN'), which is valuable. Yet it omits other behaviors such as whether the operation is read-only, authentication needs, or error/return behavior beyond the listed fields.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the main action and a clear list of returned data. The second sentence adds a specific guarantee without unnecessary detail. Every word contributes value.

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?

With one simple parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose, the retrieved fields, and a data-integrity caveat. It is nearly complete for a basic get-by-id tool, though it could explicitly state the return structure or behavior on missing IDs.

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 schema defines a single required 'id' as a uuid, and the description does not explicitly mention this parameter, resulting in 0% schema description coverage. However, the tool name and 'Load one apartment' implicitly clarify that 'id' identifies the apartment, providing some semantic context. This partial compensation merits a mid-range score.

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 the verb 'Load' with the resource 'one apartment' and enumerates the returned content (tenant, rent, address, trail folder). The 'Does not invent Anschrift or IBAN' clause further specifies data scope, and the singular focus distinguishes it from list_units.

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 phrase 'Load one apartment' clearly conveys this tool is for retrieving a single unit's details by ID, implying use when you need one unit rather than a list. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives like list_units or state when not to use it.

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