Retrieve actor details

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

The annotations already include readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is known. The description adds the ID prefix scheme, but no additional behavioral details such as return format, error cases, or rate limits. This is acceptable for a simple read operation, but not exceptional beyond the annotation.

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 only two sentences: the first states the primary purpose and input, and the second adds essential context about actor ID prefixes. It is front-loaded, concise, and every word serves a purpose.

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?

The tool has a single parameter and a readOnlyHint annotation, but no output schema. The description explains the input well but does not specify what 'details' includes or what the response structure looks like, leaving a notable gap for an AI agent that needs to understand the return value.

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 schema describes actor_id as a string with a generic example, but the description adds meaningful semantics by explaining the prefix types ('A-', 'V-', 'B-', 'E-', 'S-', 'I-'). This helps the agent construct and validate IDs, going beyond the schema's coverage.

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 uses the specific verb 'Retrieve' and identifies the resource as 'details of a specific actor (conversation participant)' using an actor ID. It also explains the ID prefix conventions, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like ResolveConversationActors or channel account retrieval tools.

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 clearly implies the tool is for fetching a single actor's details when the actor ID is known, as indicated by 'by actor ID'. It provides context with the ID prefix breakdown, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.

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