get_pmp_deal

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get details', which implies a read-only operation, but it does not disclose error handling (e.g., what happens if the ID is not found), permissions, rate limits, or response format. This is a significant gap for a tool with no 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?

The description is a single sentence that is direct and front-loaded. It contains no filler and every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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?

The tool is a simple getter with one parameter and no output schema. The description is adequate but minimal: it does not explain what 'details' includes, potential error scenarios, or the structure of the returned object. Given the lack of annotations and output schema, more context could be beneficial, but complexity is low and the description meets the minimum viable standard.

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% (the 'id' parameter is fully described as 'PMP deal ID'). The description adds the word 'by ID', which aligns with the schema, but provides no additional meaning beyond what the schema already defines.

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 action (get), the resource (PMP deal), and the scope (by ID). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_pmp_deals, create_pmp_deal, update_pmp_deal, and delete_pmp_deal, which handle collection operations or mutations.

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 have a specific deal ID and need its details. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., 'use list_pmp_deals to find IDs') or exclusions, so guidance is limited to what is naturally inferred from the verb 'get'.

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