vapi_get_assistant

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

With no annotations, the description implies a read operation ('Get'), which is transparent for a simple retrieval. However, it lacks details on potential side effects, permissions, or return format.

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 very concise (one sentence) but lacks structure; it could be improved by explicitly mentioning the ID parameter's role.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description omits expected return value details, such as the structure of the assistant object returned.

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 has a required 'id' parameter with no description, and the tool description does not explain what 'id' represents (e.g., 'the assistant's unique identifier').

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 specific Vapi assistant' clearly states the action (get) and resource (a specific assistant), distinguishing it from sibling tools like vapi_list_assistants or vapi_create_assistant.

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, such as vapi_list_assistants for multiple assistants or vapi_create_assistant for creation.

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