Credential: Get_credential

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavior beyond that: it says nothing about what happens on a missing/unknown id, permission requirements, or what the returned credential contains. For a read tool it is not misleading, but it contributes almost no additional context.

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?

A single short sentence with zero filler and the resource/scope front-loaded. It is efficient, though the extreme terseness leaves nothing to help an agent understand the return or failure behavior.

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-only lookup with a complete one-parameter schema this is adequate. Because there is no output schema, the description could have said what a credential record contains or how errors surface, and that omission leaves a modest gap.

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% and the single parameter is fully documented, including where to source the id. The description only echoes 'by id' and adds no format, type, or sourcing detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Retrieve') and resource ('Brivo credential') and scopes it to a single item resolved by id, which implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling 'Credential: List_credentials'. It does not name the sibling or any other alternative outright, so it stops short of the 5 threshold.

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?

Usage is implied by 'by id' and the schema note 'e.g. from Credential: List_credentials', suggesting the agent must first obtain a credential id from the list tool. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use statement or named alternative, so guidance remains inferred rather than stated.

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