get_va_topic

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description aligns with that. The description adds value by specifying the exact content returned ('intent and trigger phrases'), which provides behavioral/return details beyond the annotation. It does not mention openWorldHint semantics, but that is not a contradiction.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the action and key details. Every word earns its place with no redundant filler or repetition of structured data.

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 get-by-id operation with one parameter and readOnly annotation, the description is adequate. It names the return specifics (intent and trigger phrases) and is complete enough for the agent to invoke correctly. A minor gap is lack of information about error behavior or response format, but the tool's simplicity reduces the need.

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%, and the parameter sys_id is described as 'Topic sys_id', which is clear. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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 the verb 'Get' and the resource 'Virtual Agent topic details', with specific content 'including intent and trigger phrases'. This distinguishes it from sibling list tools like get_virtual_agent_topics, which likely returns multiple topics.

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 this tool is for fetching a single topic's details, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives such as get_virtual_agent_topics or list_va_topics_full. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided, so the usage context is only implied.

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