Retrieve a SIM card

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, and the description merely restates 'Read-only,' adding no new behavioral context. It does note the underlying GET endpoint, but says nothing about error behavior, missing IDs, or lookup scope.

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?

Three terse fragments with the resource stated first and no filler; size is well matched to a trivial getter. It borders on under-specification rather than being verbose.

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 tool with rich annotations and a fully documented schema, the essentials are present. However, with no output schema, the description never indicates what a SIM card record contains, leaving the return shape entirely unknown.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters (id and response_format, including the markdown/json enum) are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no meaning beyond that, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the work.

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 and resource ('Retrieve a SIM card') and identifies the endpoint, so the agent knows exactly what it fetches. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling placetel_list_sim_cards, relying on singular/plural inference.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus placetel_list_sim_cards or other retrieval tools, and no mention of prerequisites or when this would be the wrong choice. The agent must infer usage purely from the tool name.

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