get_charge

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

The description indicates a read-only operation (get details), but with no annotations, it does not provide additional behavioral context such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or what 'details' include. It is adequate for a simple retrieval but lacks depth.

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 clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the purpose and fits within a line.

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 the tool is a simple retrieval with one parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It does not specify return fields, error handling, or pagination, leaving some gaps for an agent to infer.

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 coverage is 100% with uuid described as 'Charge uuid'. The description adds 'by its uuid', which is redundant with the schema. No additional parameter semantics are provided, so baseline score 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 clearly states the tool retrieves details of a specific charge by its uuid, with a specific verb (get) and resource (charge). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_charges (lists multiple), cancel_charge (cancels), and refund_charge (refunds).

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 alternatives like list_charges or other charge retrieval tools. The description implies it's for a single charge by UUID but does not explain when to prefer it over others.

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