Get vendor

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description's only added behavior is the return content hint (address and contact details), which is real value given no output schema, but it says nothing about error behavior for an unknown ID.

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?

A single short phrase with zero filler and the payload information up front. It is efficient, though it is a sentence fragment rather than a structured statement of action and result.

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 two-parameter read-only getter with full schema coverage and rich annotations, the description is minimally adequate: it tells the agent what comes back. It omits what happens with an invalid or missing ID and does not point at wave_list_vendors for lookup-by-name, leaving small but real gaps.

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 both parameters (id, businessId) are documented in the schema, including the default-resolution note for businessId. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the baseline 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?

"One vendor with address and contact details" conveys the resource (a single vendor) and the payload shape (address, contact details), but it is a noun fragment with no verb and never names the sibling it contrasts with, such as wave_list_vendors. An agent can infer retrieval from the title, but the description itself does not do the work.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no routing to alternatives: nothing says to use wave_list_vendors when the ID is unknown or wave_get_context to resolve the default businessId. The singular "one vendor" only implicitly distinguishes it from the list tool.

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