Fetch Actor details

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, which are consistent with the read-only nature of the tool. The description goes beyond annotations by detailing the 'output' parameter behavior, default settings, and common patterns, providing full transparency.

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 well-structured, starting with the core purpose, then detailing the output parameter, followed by usage context and examples. Each sentence adds meaningful information without redundancy or unnecessary length.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (nested output object with multiple boolean flags), the description is comprehensive. It covers the actor parameter format, output parameter behavior, common usage patterns, and provides practical examples. The presence of an output schema means return values are adequately documented elsewhere.

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 100% description coverage, but the description adds significant value: it explains the full name format for 'actor', clarifies how the 'output' boolean flags work (default all true except mcpTools, selective setting, common patterns), and provides practical usage 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?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves detailed information about an Actor by ID or full name, and distinguishes it from siblings like search-actors and fetch-apify-docs by specifying its use for querying Actor-specific details, documentation, input requirements, or MCP 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 provides explicit context for when to use the tool (e.g., querying Actor details, documentation) and includes examples. While it does not explicitly list when not to use or alternatives, the context and sibling tool list offer implicit guidance.

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