accelo_get_referral

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get' implies a read, but there is no mention of permissions, rate limits, error behavior for a missing ID, or what the response contains.

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?

Very short and front-loaded with the core purpose in the first line. The Args block is boilerplate but not wasteful; nothing extraneous, though nothing extra is offered either.

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 two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient. It does not describe the return shape or the meaning of 'fields', leaving gaps an agent might hit.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It loosely names both parameters (id as the referral ID, fields as additional fields to return), which helps, but 'fields' is vague with no syntax or examples.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (get a single referral by ID), which is clear. However, it does nothing to distinguish itself from the many sibling getters or from accelo_list_referrals / accelo_count_referrals.

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 versus accelo_list_referrals or accelo_count_referrals, and no prerequisites or exclusions are stated. The agent must infer the single-record vs list distinction from the name alone.

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