get_universe_details

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it says nothing about read-only semantics, permission/auth requirements, or failure behavior for a bad or unknown universe id. It hints at the entity's identifying fields but adds little beyond that.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler; the core action and target lead the sentence. Slightly dense parenthetical, but nothing wasted.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail is excused, and a one-param read getter doesn't demand much. Still, the description omits the id's accepted format and any routing hint versus the several sibling universe tools, which is a real gap for a family this crowded.

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 0% for the single universe_id parameter, and the description does not explain what form that id takes (CUID, name, or engine-qualified identifier) or whether it is case-sensitive. The mention of 'unx'/'unv' engine types is entity trivia rather than parameter guidance.

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?

States a specific verb (Retrieves) and resource (detailed metadata of a specific Universe), and the parenthetical clarifies the entity's identity fields (engine type, name, CUID). It implicitly separates itself from the list-style sibling get_universes by emphasizing 'a specific Universe', though it never names get_universe_structure or get_universe_related_reports as distinct alternatives.

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 offers no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no indication of when an agent should pick this over get_universes, get_universe_structure, or get_universe_related_reports. Usage is only inferable from the name and the single required id.

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