Api journeys cascade info 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 structurally, but the description adds nothing beyond that — not what a "cascade preview" computes (e.g. dependent journey steps counted before a delete), nor any permission or performance notes. It does not contradict the annotations, so no contradiction flag.

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 that brevity is under-specification rather than conciseness: a two-word fragment ending in a colon with nothing front-loaded or explained. Length is not the problem; content is absent.

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 an endpoint whose whole value is explaining cascade impact, there is no output schema and no description of the return shape, so the agent has zero basis to interpret results. Nothing an agent needs to invoke or trust this tool is present.

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?

There is one required parameter, id, with 0% schema description coverage and a bare string type. The description does not clarify whether id refers to a journey, a step, or a parent object, nor its format, so the parameter is fully undocumented.

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 the fragment "Cascade preview:", which only restates the tail of the tool name (cascade_info_retrieve) without a verb, a resource, or an object it operates on. An agent cannot tell from this text what the endpoint actually returns, nor how it differs from the many sibling cascade_info_retrieve tools.

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 call this versus alternatives such as journeys_retrieve, journeys_object_retrieve, or journeys_list. The trailing colon suggests missing content rather than a deliberate instruction.

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