Api contracts status retrieve

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

The description says contracts can be 'viewed or edited', implying a write capability, while annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and idempotentHint=true. That is a direct contradiction. Otherwise nothing is disclosed about the response.

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?

It is one short, front-loaded sentence with no padding, but that brevity reflects boilerplate rather than economy — almost no information is delivered.

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?

With no output schema, the description should say what a status-retrieve endpoint returns (presumably the enumerated contract status values). It does not, leaving the agent unable to tell what payload to expect or how it differs from sibling choice endpoints.

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?

The tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify; baseline 4 applies. The description neither adds nor misleads about inputs.

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 is generic Django-REST boilerplate ('allows contracts to be viewed or edited') that restates the resource name without stating the specific operation. It does not reveal that this is a status/choices lookup, nor distinguish it from ciso_assistant_api_contracts_retrieve or contracts_list.

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 about when to call this instead of the many sibling contracts endpoints (list, retrieve, object_retrieve, termination_reason, currency, governing_law_country). With zero parameters, an agent has no way to infer a trigger condition from the description alone.

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