Show Custom Fields Section

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. Description adds that it returns a JSON object, but does not disclose additional behaviors like error handling, authentication specifics, or what happens on missing ID. No contradiction 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?

Description is 4 sentences, includes redundant info like required parameters (already in schema) and API endpoint details. While structured, it could be trimmed for conciseness without losing essential information.

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?

No output schema exists, and description only says 'Returns a JSON object' without detailing its structure. Pagination parameters (page, per_page) are present but their applicability to a single-resource endpoint is not addressed. Incomplete for a read tool.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for all 4 parameters. The description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides. 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?

The description clearly states the tool returns details for a specified Custom Field Section, using identifiers. The verb 'Returns' and resource are specific. However, the phrase 'Custom - Configurable Tools' is confusing and may mislead, slightly reducing clarity. It distinguishes from siblings like list_custom_field_sections.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. It says 'Use this to fetch full details,' but does not mention when not to use it, nor compare with similar listing tools. No explicit context or exclusions.

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