get_time_spec

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a non-mutating read, and 'Returns the details' is consistent with that. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotation (no auth requirements, no not-found behavior, no pagination or cost notes), which is acceptable but thin given the low bar set by the annotations.

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 tight sentence with the resource and key front-loaded; nothing is padded. The trailing '(wraps NBAPI GetTimeSpec)' is internal provenance that doesn't help selection, keeping it short of a 5.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the definition covers the minimum: what it returns and what it needs. It omits the shape of the returned time spec and the relationship to get_time_specs/get_time_spec_group, which would materially help an agent choose correctly.

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%, so TIMESPECKEY is already fully documented (required, unique key). The description names the key but adds no format, origin, or lookup hints beyond what the schema states, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (Returns) and resource (details of a single time spec) plus the identifying input (TIMESPECKEY). The word 'single' implicitly separates it from the plural sibling get_time_specs, but that sibling is never named, so differentiation must be inferred.

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?

Usage is only implied: fetch one time spec when you have its key. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no statement of when to prefer get_time_specs (list) over this, and no mention of error behavior for an unknown key.

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