gorelo_get_custom_asset

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description's burden is light. It adds nothing beyond that, though – no mention of behavior when the id doesn't exist (error vs. empty) or of permissions. Minimum viable given the annotation coverage.

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 short sentence with zero filler, and the key constraint ('by id') is front-loaded. Nothing could be removed without losing meaning.

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 one-parameter read tool with annotations covering safety and full schema coverage, the description plus structured data is sufficient to call it correctly. A note on not-found behavior or the returned asset shape would round it out, but there is no output schema to compensate for it.

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?

Only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents customAssetId. The description merely echoes that a lookup key is used, adding no format or example detail beyond the schema, which is the baseline 3 case.

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 ('Gets') and resource ('custom asset') plus the lookup key ('by id'), which distinguishes it from list_custom_assets. It does not explicitly name the sibling it replaces, but the singular 'a single custom asset' makes the split from the list/create/update siblings clear enough.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and never mentions that gorelo_list_custom_assets is the alternative when the id is unknown. Usage must be inferred entirely from the tool name and the 'by id' phrasing.

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