duo_get_integration

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It explicitly states that only metadata is returned and secret keys are stripped before response, which is valuable behavioral information for an agent. It does not discuss error cases or rate limits, but the core safety-relevant behavior is disclosed.

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 tightly written sentences with no filler. The main operation is front-loaded, and the important secret-stripping note is included without bloat.

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?

The tool has one documented parameter and a straightforward purpose. The description explains what the tool returns, how to identify the integration, and what it deliberately omits. Without an output schema, a bit more detail about the metadata structure could help, but this is adequate for reliable invocation.

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%, so the schema already documents the integrationKey parameter. The description reinforces that it is used for a single integration lookup but adds no format, validation, or additional semantic detail beyond the schema.

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 operation: retrieve full metadata for a single integration by integration_key. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like duo_list_integrations and duo_get_user by specifying the unique resource and lookup method.

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 clearly implies this tool is for fetching one integration when you already have its integration_key. It does not explicitly name duo_list_integrations as the alternative for enumeration, but the scoping is clear enough to guide selection.

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