Api ebios rm elementary actions object retrieve

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description contributes nothing beyond that: no note on what the object contains, permission requirements, or not-found behavior.

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 short, but it is short because it contains no information at all — an identifier string rather than a sentence. Being brief does not earn credit when nothing is communicated.

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 retrieve tool with an undocumented required parameter and no output schema, the description should explain what object is returned and how to obtain a valid id. None of that is present, making the definition wholly inadequate.

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 single required parameter 'id' has 0% schema description coverage, so the description carries the full burden, yet it says nothing about the identifier's format or source. The name 'id' is largely self-explanatory, which is the only reason this is not a 1.

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 simply the tool's name repeated verbatim ('api_ebios_rm_elementary_actions_object_retrieve'), a tautology that adds no explanation of what is retrieved. An agent can infer only from the name that it fetches an EBIOS RM elementary action object, but nothing is clarified beyond that.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives, and no distinction from siblings such as ..._elementary_actions_retrieve, ..._elementary_actions_list, or ..._object_retrieve variants. The agent is left to infer everything from the name.

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