tiendanube_get_dispute

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

With no annotations, the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only states the generic action 'get details', without disclosing any side effects (likely none), permissions needed, rate limits, or what the returned details include. This minimal disclosure fails to inform the AI beyond the tool name.

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 at six words, with no superfluous content. However, while efficient, it lacks necessary detail to be fully self-contained, but it is not verbose or poorly structured.

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 simplicity of a single-parameter read operation, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what details are returned, any expected behavior (e.g., error handling), or how it integrates with other tools like tiendanube_list_disputes. The lack of output schema amplifies this gap.

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 coverage is 100% with a single required parameter 'dispute_id' described as 'Dispute ID'. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter's format, constraints, or usage beyond what the schema already provides, resulting in no extra value.

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' and resource 'details of a specific dispute', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like tiendanube_list_disputes (list all) and tiendanube_update_dispute (modify). However, it does not explicitly say it retrieves a single dispute by ID, which would be slightly clearer.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as listing disputes first or using other get_* tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions, leaving the AI without context for selection.

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