Get Policies

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a fetch/read operation and mentions return types, but does not detail permissions, errors, or rate limits. This is a moderate disclosure but not a major gap.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that states the action, resource, and accepted identifier types with 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?

For a simple one-parameter read tool, the description adequately covers the core function and output shape (summaries and hydrated details). While there is no output schema or explicit mention of pagination, the description is sufficient for a straightforward fetch operation.

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 only defines clientId as a required string with minLength. The description adds meaningful semantics by explaining that clientId can be a customer GUID or customer number, which the schema alone does not convey. It does not specify exact format or validation, so not a 5.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('policies') with qualifiers ('for an AMS360 customer GUID or customer number'), clearly stating what the tool does. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_clients and get_client, which target different resources.

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 clear context: use this tool when you need policy summaries or hydrated details for a specific customer by GUID or number. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not conditions, but the scope is unambiguous.

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