automations_get_automation_trace

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

With no annotations, the description tells what the tool returns (steps, timing, condition results) but omits prerequisites, error conditions, or permissions. It is adequate but incomplete.

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?

A single concise sentence that conveys the core purpose. Could be slightly expanded to include usage context, but not overly long.

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 two-parameter read tool with output schema, the description covers what is returned but omits relationship to listing traces and dependencies. Adequate but not fully complete.

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%, and the description adds no meaning beyond the parameter names. 'automation_id' and 'run_id' are not explained in terms of format or source.

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 tool retrieves a full automation trace for a specific run, listing components (steps, timing, condition results). It distinguishes from siblings like automations_list_automation_traces (listing) and automations_get_script_trace (scripts).

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 needing to first list traces to get a run_id, or differences from automations_get_script_trace. The description lacks context for proper selection.

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