get_automation_rule

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does reasonably: it discloses the required `automations:manage` permission, the read-only GET endpoint, and the shape of what comes back (conditions, actions, enabled flag). It stops short of error/permission-failure behavior or whether the rule is workspace-scoped.

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 core sentence is front-loaded and useful, but it is wrapped in low-value scaffolding: the title line repeats the tool name, and the raw endpoint plus 'Tags: Automations' are auto-generated noise that costs tokens without informing tool selection.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the definition covers what is needed: what is fetched, what the payload contains, and what permission is required. Only the relationship to the list tool remains unstated.

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?

There is a single `id` parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already explains it as a path parameter. The description only restates the endpoint path and adds no format, lookup, or validation detail beyond what the schema provides — the baseline for full coverage.

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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (a single automation rule) and enumerates what the response contains: conditions, actions, enabled state. That distinguishes it from the list sibling get_automation_rules by implication, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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 phrase 'A single automation rule' implies this is the detail fetch rather than the list fetch, and the permission requirement hints at a prerequisite. Beyond that there is no explicit when-to-use, no exclusion, and no pointer to get_automation_rules for enumeration.

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