Api questions 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, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that boilerplate, and its "CRUD" phrasing is imprecise for a read-only GET, though it describes the endpoint family rather than directly claiming a mutation.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no wasted clauses, but it is thin to the point of under-specification rather than genuinely efficient.

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 single-parameter read tool with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the definition is minimally sufficient to attempt a call, but it omits the id's meaning and any differentiation from the numerous sibling Question retrieve/list endpoints.

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 description says nothing about the sole required parameter "id" — no statement that it is the Question's identifier, its format (string/UUID), or what happens when it does not exist. The single obvious id argument makes the gap small, but the description does not compensate for it.

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?

"API endpoint for Question CRUD" names the resource (Question) but describes the whole CRUD family rather than this specific operation. The word "CRUD" is boilerplate that does not tell an agent this is a read-by-id call, and it fails to distinguish this tool from the many sibling Question endpoints (questions_list, questions_retrieve, questions_object_retrieve).

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 statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as questions_list (to enumerate) or questions_retrieve. An agent must infer usage purely from the tool name, and the description offers no conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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