Get My Ticket

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description provides rich behavioral context by listing the specific data fields returned ('state, seats, price, unpaid amount, cancel conditions'). This informs the agent about the successful response structure.

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 definition is highly concise and front-loads the core function and scope in a single, powerful sentence with no unnecessary fluff.

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 lookup tool, the definition is reasonably complete as it specifies the key information returned (price, state, etc.). It is adequate for the task but doesn't specify how optional parameters like `lang` influence the data beyond existence.

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 schema coverage is moderate (67%), meaning there is room for improvement. However, since the description adds no specific meaning or constraints to the parameters (`ticket_id`, `lang`, `currency`), it receives the baseline score.

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 one ticket') and the scope ('of the logged-in account'). While it doesn't explicitly state it requires a specific ID, the combination of the name and description is specific and distinct from listing tickets.

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 implies usage by focusing on the retrieved data, but it does not explicitly guide the agent on when to choose this over similar sibling tools like `list_my_tickets` or `get_ticket`.

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