deliveries_retrieve__get_delivery_by_id

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds valuable context: it is a wrapper with no own throttling, consumes the underlying API quota, and recommends caching. It also states the None-return behavior. This exceeds the baseline set by annotations without contradicting them.

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?

Two sentences with no fluff. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the caching/quota note is a single addition. Every word earns its place.

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 get-by-id tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the return behavior (None if not found) and the caching/quota aspect. It does not describe the structure of the returned order, but that is not required given the absence of an output schema. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to call it correctly.

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 description does not explain the parameters order_id or organization_id beyond the generic 'by id'. It fails to clarify that organization_id is required for scoping or that order_id is the primary identifier. The parameter names are self-explanatory, but the description adds no semantic value to compensate for the lack of schema 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'), resource ('delivery by id'), and behavior ('returns None if not found'), which clearly distinguishes it from the plural sibling get_deliveries_by_id. The singular nature is explicit in the text, making the purpose 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 does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or state when to use this versus alternatives like get_deliveries_by_id or search_deliveries. Usage is implied by the singular 'by id', but no explicit guidance or exclusions are provided, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context.

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