ghl_get_appointment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as error handling (e.g., what happens if the event ID is invalid), authentication requirements, or the structure of the returned data. The description only states the basic operation.

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 a single sentence, cleanly structured, with no redundant words. It achieves maximum conciseness while still conveying the core 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?

This is a simple one-parameter read tool with no output schema or annotations. The description is adequate for a basic get-by-ID operation, but it lacks details on the returned payload or edge cases. Given the low complexity, it does not need extensive elaboration, but a more complete description would mention what is returned or any limitations.

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%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'event ID' but this merely restates the parameter name 'eventId' without adding meaning such as where to find it, its format, or how it relates to appointments. The description does not help the agent understand the parameter beyond the name.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('appointment'), and the scope ('specific ... by event ID'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that list appointments or events, such as ghl_get_calendar_events and ghl_get_contact_appointments.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, nor any distinction from list or search tools. The only implied usage is that you need an event ID, but this is not stated as a decision criterion.

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