Api ebios rm strategic scenarios retrieve

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The one genuinely additive detail is that unauthorized related fields are masked, which tells the agent the payload may be permission-filtered; however, error behavior for missing ids and the shape of the masking are not described.

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?

A single short sentence with no filler, but the brevity comes at the cost of under-specification rather than economy. The most useful fragment, field masking, appears late and unexplained.

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 and no parameter documentation, the description is the only place to explain what comes back and what an id refers to, and it does neither. For a per-object retrieve endpoint in a large sibling namespace, an agent is left guessing.

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 description coverage is 0% and the single 'id' parameter has no type-of-identifier hint (UUID? integer? ref_id?). The description never mentions the id at all, so it does not compensate for the undocumented parameter.

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 says 'Return a single object', which conveys the retrieve semantics but never names the resource (an EBIOS RM strategic scenario). The agent must rely entirely on the tool name and sibling list to know what object is being fetched, and the id-based lookup is never stated.

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 guidance on when to use this versus the sibling list, object_retrieve, or cascade_info_retrieve variants. Nothing indicates that it requires a known id and is therefore a follow-up call after a list operation.

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