Retrieve custom channel account details

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already indicates a safe read operation. The description adds context about the returned fields (channel, inbox ID, delivery identifiers) but does not disclose the full response shape, pagination, or error behavior. It provides some value beyond the annotation but not extensive.

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 sentence, directly states the action, and includes the key metadata fields. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must convey return behavior. It lists some returned fields but uses 'including,' which suggests a non-exhaustive list. It also lacks any mention of error scenarios or edge cases, leaving some ambiguity for a retrieval tool.

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%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description does not add any new parameter semantics beyond that, matching the baseline for high schema 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 clearly identifies the resource as 'detailed metadata about a channel account on a custom channel.' It also lists the specific metadata fields included (channel, inbox ID, delivery identifiers), which helps distinguish it from the sibling tool GetChannelAccountDetails.

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?

Usage is implied by the description: this tool is for retrieving details of a custom channel account. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives, and the sibling GetChannelAccountDetails could overlap.

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