get_redirect_path

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint: true, so the description is free to add other context. It adds 'including its current mappings' which gives insight into what is returned, enhancing transparency beyond annotations. No contradictory behaviors.

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 one sentence (12 words), front-loaded with the action, and contains no extraneous information. Every word adds value.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, read-only, no output schema), the description adequately conveys what the tool does. It could optionally mention that it returns details like mapping but it's sufficient for an agent to understand its purpose.

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% with the parameter redirect_path_id described as 'ID of the redirect path'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond that, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get details of a specific redirect path, including its current mappings.' The verb 'Get' and resource 'redirect path' are explicit, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_redirect_path_mappings' which likely returns only mappings.

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 implies usage when you need details of a specific redirect path, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_redirect_domains' or 'get_redirect_path_mapping_logs'. No exclusions or alternative tool mentions.

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