yougile_get_string_sticker

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavioral value by revealing that states are included in the response, saving the agent from expecting a separate state endpoint. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Extremely concise: two short sentences that front-load the operation and include a useful response characteristic. No filler or redundant explanation.

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 read operation with one parameter, strong annotations, and no output schema, the description is adequately complete. It names the trigger (ID), the operation, and a key response feature (embedded states). A richer return-format description would be nice but isn't necessary for this tool's simplicity.

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 only parameter, 'id', is already fully described in the schema as 'Sticker UUID' with 100% coverage. The description restates the ID requirement but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clear and specific: 'Get a string sticker by ID' identifies the exact operation and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools such as list/create/update string stickers by focusing on retrieval by identifier. The additional 'States are embedded in the response' clarifies an important aspect of the result.

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?

Implies usage: use when you have the sticker UUID and need a single string sticker. It does not explicitly name alternatives like yougile_list_string_stickers for browsing, but the simple get-by-ID pattern is evident. The note about embedded states suggests you don't need a separate state-fetch call.

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