hs_get_property

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

The description discloses that the tool returns a 'full definition' with options and validation rules, indicating a read operation. However, with no annotations, it lacks details on authentication, performance, or absence of side effects. The transparency is adequate but not exhaustive.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded with the key action. Slight improvement could be made by breaking into bullet points, but it is already concise.

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 tool with two parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (full definition including options and validation rules). It is complete enough for an agent to understand the basic behavior, though it could mention the absence of side effects.

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 50%; only propertyName has a description. The tool description does not explain parameters, leaving objectType's purpose implicit (though the enum hints at CRM objects). The description fails to compensate for the schema's gaps.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'full definition of a single CRM property', and specifies included details like options and validation rules. It differentiates from sibling tools like hs_list_properties by emphasizing singularity and depth.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., hs_list_properties), nor does it mention prerequisites or when not to use it. The agent must infer usage from the tool name and context.

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