get_notice_detail

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full responsibility for behavioral transparency. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, error handling, or the nature of output (despite an output schema existing). For a tool that fetches details, stating it is read-only would help.

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 description is extremely concise with two sentences, no filler, and the most important information (purpose and input source) is front-loaded. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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?

Given the tool has an output schema (not shown), the description does not need to detail return values. However, it lacks completeness in behavioral transparency and parameter semantics for a tool with only one parameter and no annotations. The core usage is covered, but safety details are missing.

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 schema describes only one parameter (notice_url) with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The tool description adds value by stating the URL should come from get_placement_notices, providing semantic context. However, it does not explain the expected format or constraints beyond 'URL'.

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 clearly states the verb 'Get full details' and identifies the resource as 'placement notice'. It distinguishes from sibling tools by explicitly referencing 'get_placement_notices' as the source of the URL, making the purpose specific and unambiguous.

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?

The description provides clear guidance on when to use the tool (to get full details of a specific notice) and how to obtain the input (URL from get_placement_notices). While it does not explicitly say when not to use it or list alternatives, the context of a detail retrieval tool is well understood.

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