viewAuction

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Get details' clearly implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly state side-effect-freeness, response structure, or any other behavioral caveats. It is adequate for a simple retrieval but minimal.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence states the purpose and scope with zero waste. The API reference link is a useful extra without bloating the description.

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 simple one-parameter read tool, the description is largely sufficient. It clearly identifies the operation and resource, though it does not describe return values or error cases. Since no output schema exists, a bit more detail on response content would be valuable, but its absence does not prevent correct invocation.

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 input schema already fully documents the only parameter, auctionId, as 'Auction ID' (100% schema coverage). The description adds no extra semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 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?

The description 'Get details for a single auction' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing this tool from siblings like listAuctions and viewAuctionHistory. The scope 'single' explicitly differentiates it from viewAuctions.

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?

Clear context is provided: use this when you need details for one specific auction, identified by an auction ID. There is no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or named alternatives, but the 'single' qualifier implies the appropriate context.

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