Get a single autouser run

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by disclosing that the response includes a viewUrl deep-link and summaries, which are behavioral traits beyond the schema. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The description is front-loaded with the core action and resource, followed by key additional information (deep-link) and an example. Every sentence earns its place.

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 presence of an output schema and comprehensive annotations, the description is fully adequate. It covers the purpose, key response feature (viewUrl), and provides an example, leaving no critical gaps for a simple fetch 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?

The schema has 100% coverage with basic descriptions ('Evaluation id (URL path).'). The description does not add further semantic details about the parameters beyond the example usage, so it meets but does not exceed the baseline for high 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 clearly states the action ('Fetch one autouser run') and the resource ('with autouser+evaluation summaries'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like autousers_run (create) and autouser_run_turns_list (list turns) by specifying it retrieves a single run with summaries and a deep-link.

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 implies usage when you have an evaluationId and runId to retrieve run details, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., autouser_status_get for status) or provide exclusions. The example hints at typical use, but no direct guidance.

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