Api organisation objectives cascade info retrieve

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered elsewhere. 'Cascade preview' weakly reinforces that this is a non-mutating preview, but adds nothing about what the cascade contains, its size, cost, or permissions required. With annotations carrying the burden, this is a minimal addition.

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?

The fragment is short and technically front-loaded, but it is under-specified rather than concise. Brevity here costs the agent almost all actionable information, so the few words do not earn their place.

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 tool with one undocumented parameter, no output schema, and no explanation of what a 'cascade preview' returns, the description is essentially empty. Nothing tells the agent what to expect back or how to interpret the preview.

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 and the description says nothing about it. An agent cannot tell whether id refers to an organisation objective, a folder, or a root node for the cascade. The description fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 just the fragment 'Cascade preview:', which hints at a preview operation but never states a verb, resource, or scope. Because the sibling set contains dozens of *_cascade_info_retrieve tools (journeys, actors, answers, presets, etc.), an agent gets no help distinguishing this organisation-objectives variant from its near-identical siblings beyond the name itself.

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 tool, when to prefer object_retrieve or list instead, or what the preview is for. The two-word fragment provides no context that would route an agent to this tool over its many cascade_info siblings.

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