get_estimate

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint: true, which covers the read-only nature. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., what 'full details' includes, error behavior, or authorization requirements). It simply restates the action without enriching beyond the annotation.

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?

The description is a single, focused sentence that leads with the action ('Get full details') and the key differentiator ('by ID'). It contains no unnecessary words or repetition, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse.

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 and a readOnlyHint annotation, the description is minimally adequate. It tells the agent what the tool does and the required identifier. However, it omits details about the return format (no output schema) and any error cases, which a more thorough description could provide.

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%, and the single parameter estimateId is only a number. The description merely says 'by ID' without explaining what the ID represents, its format, or any constraints beyond the schema's 'required' flag. It provides minimal added meaning, failing to compensate for the low coverage.

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 states a specific verb 'Get' with a clear resource ('single estimate') and scope ('by ID'). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'get_estimates' (plural) which likely lists estimates, making it easy for an agent to select the correct tool for a single-record fetch.

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 implies usage (when you have an estimate ID) but does not explicitly contrast with get_estimates for listing or mention any preconditions. It offers no 'when-not-to-use' guidance, so it relies on the agent to infer the appropriate context from the sibling list.

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