FreelanceOS

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

Annotations already declare read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent traits. The description adds valuable behavioral context about the returned payload ('including its content, type, and sent status'), disclosing what specific data fields the agent can expect to receive beyond what the schema structure implies.

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?

Two tightly constructed sentences with zero redundancy. The first states the action, the second states the trigger condition and return value details. Information is front-loaded and every clause earns its place.

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 single-parameter retrieval tool, the description is complete. It compensates for the missing output schema by explicitly listing the key returned fields (content, type, sent status). It could reach 5 by briefly noting error behavior (e.g., invalid UUID) or pagination (none needed here).

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 100% with the followup_id parameter fully documented ('Unique UUID identifier...'). The description references 'unique ID' aligning with the schema, but adds no additional syntax constraints or format details beyond the excellent schema coverage, meeting the baseline.

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 ('Retrieve') with a clear resource ('single follow-up record') and scope ('by its unique ID'). It implicitly distinguishes from siblings like followups.messages.list (plural retrieval) and followups.messages.create (mutation) through the singular 'single' and verb choice.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use context ('when the freelancer asks to view the full details of a specific saved follow-up'). It implies the singular nature distinguishing it from list operations, though it could be strengthened by explicitly naming the list alternative for bulk retrieval.

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