Pass: Get_mobile_pass

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safe-read nature is covered by structured data. The description adds useful scoping context by saying 'the current user's', implying it operates on the authenticated identity with no ID argument required. It does not describe the return payload or whether the pass is cached/regenerated.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is exactly as long as the information it carries.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining what is returned, and 'mobile pass' is left undefined — an agent cannot tell whether it receives an image, a token, a URL, or metadata. For a zero-parameter read tool this is the main gap, though the core operation is clear.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The phrase 'current user's' usefully clarifies that no user identifier is accepted and the subject is implicit from authentication, which is the only parameter-relevant information available.

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 (Get) and resource (the current user's Brivo mobile pass), which is clearly distinguishable from the sibling GET tools such as Get_user or Get_credential. It stops short of explaining what a 'mobile pass' is or how it differs from other credential retrieval tools, but the action itself is unambiguous.

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 offers no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. An agent must infer entirely from the name that this is the tool for retrieving a mobile pass rather than Get_user_digital_credential or Get_credential.

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