ecp_apps_get

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only lookup via 'get', but it does not describe what 'details' include, what happens if the id is invalid, whether authentication is required, or that this operation has no side effects.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to meaning and it is far more economical than the schema alone.

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 one-parameter getter, the description is minimally sufficient, but with no annotations and no output schema it leaves the response shape, error behavior, and return content completely unspecified.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for the single 'id' parameter. The phrase 'by id' clarifies that the parameter is the app's identifier, but it does not specify the id format, its source, or how it relates to results from ecp_apps_list.

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 specific verb ('get'), a specific resource ('one app'), and the lookup key ('by id'). It clearly distinguishes this from ecp_apps_list, which targets multiple apps, and from the create/delete/update siblings.

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 clearly implies the tool is for fetching a single app's details, but it does not explicitly say when to prefer it over ecp_apps_list or mention any conditions or exclusions. The usage context is clear but not fully specified.

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