Api privacy data contractors object retrieve

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

The description says data contractors can be 'viewed or edited' while annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false for a picker-style object retrieve. That is a direct contradiction of the safety profile, and it says nothing about lookup-miss behavior or permissions.

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 a single short sentence with no filler, so it is concise, but the terseness comes at the cost of substance rather than from efficient information density.

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 has to carry the whole burden for a retrieve-by-id operation, and it delivers only a boilerplate viewset sentence. An agent cannot tell what it returns or how the object is selected.

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 sole parameter (id, required) is never mentioned in the description. The agent learns nothing about whether this id is a UUID, integer-like string, or object hash, nor what happens on a miss.

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 restates the tool name in generic terms: 'allows data contractors to be viewed or edited.' It never says this is a single-object retrieve by identifier, and 'viewed or edited' blurs together what siblings like _list, _retrieve, _update, and _object_retrieve separately do.

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 at all: no indication of when to pick this object-retrieve over the list endpoint, the plain _retrieve endpoint, or the update endpoint, and no prerequisites or conditions given.

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