vast42_get_campaign_assignment

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get', which merely echoes the tool name, and does not disclose return format, error behavior, or the fact that it is a read-only operation beyond the verb 'get'.

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 with no unnecessary words. It is concise and clearly placed, though it sacrifices substantive detail for brevity.

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 a nearly identical sibling tool without the 'vast42' prefix, the description fails to clarify which version it targets. It also does not describe what is returned, making it incomplete for a simple get operation.

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 documents the 'id' parameter (100% coverage) with a clear description. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying that the ID identifies a single assignment.

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 a single VAST 4.2 campaign assignment' clearly specifies the action (get), resource (campaign assignment), scope (single), and version (VAST 4.2). This distinguishes it from list/create/update/delete siblings and names the exact entity.

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 the similarly named 'get_campaign_assignment' or the list variant. The word 'single' implies an ID is needed, but alternatives, prerequisites, or exclusion criteria are not mentioned.

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