get_applicant

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature or error behavior. It only mentions output fields (external[], links[]) but fails to state that this is a read operation, what happens if IDs are invalid, or any 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?

The description is very short (one line) but sacrifices clarity for brevity. Terms like 'external[]' and 'links[]' may be ambiguous. Could be more informative without being verbose.

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?

Given no output schema, the description should fully explain the return object. Merely mentioning two array fields is insufficient for a 'full applicant card'. Missing details on other fields, errors, and permissions.

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?

Input schema provides clear parameter descriptions (Account ID, Applicant ID). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so with 100% schema coverage, score is at baseline 3.

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 'Full applicant card' combined with the tool name clearly indicates retrieval of a complete applicant record. Including '(external[], links[])' hints at specific fields, distinguishing it from list tools. However, it could be more explicit like 'Retrieve full applicant details by ID.'

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 on when to use this tool versus siblings like list_applicants or search_applicants. The description lacks context for appropriate usage scenarios or prerequisites.

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