get_carrier

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

Description only says 'Get details' with no behavioral traits disclosed (e.g., response structure, performance, or side effects). No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden but fails to add context beyond purpose.

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?

Single sentence is extremely concise. However, the lack of any additional context (like return value hints) means it slightly underserves despite brevity. Still, no wasted words.

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?

With a single simple parameter and no output schema, the description is minimal but not fully complete. It does not explain what 'details' are returned, leaving the agent uncertain about the response. Adequate for a basic get but could be improved.

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% and parameter description ('Carrier ID') matches schema. Description adds no extra meaning beyond what schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 applies.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Get' and resource 'carrier' with specificity 'for a specific carrier', distinguishing it from list_carriers (which returns multiple).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_carriers or update_carrier. The description implies use for detailed single-carrier lookup but does not explicitly state when-not or suggest siblings.

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