get_publisher

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It only says 'Get details' without indicating whether archived publishers are included, what fields are returned, or how errors are handled. This is minimal and leaves key behavioral traits unspecified.

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 clear sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, which is appropriate for a simple get operation. However, it is slightly under-specified but still 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?

Given the presence of related tools (get_archived_publisher, list_publishers), the description does not clarify its scope (e.g., active vs. archived) and with no output schema it does not hint at the return payload. For a tool with such simple parameters, it is incomplete.

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?

The input schema fully describes the only parameter (`id` as 'Publisher ID'), and schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no extra semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 'Get details of a specific publisher' clearly states the action (get) and resource (publisher), and 'specific' implies retrieval by ID, which aligns with the single `id` parameter. However, it does not distinguish between active and archived publishers (get_archived_publisher exists), so it misses the sibling differentiation needed for a 5.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_publishers or get_archived_publisher. There are no mentions of active vs. archived publishers, nor any exclusions or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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