Get Satisfaction Survey

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the read-only nature is fully covered. The description adds no extra behavioral context beyond the endpoint path and 'retrieve' wording, which doesn't contradict annotations. For a simple GET-by-ID, this is adequate but not additive.

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 with zero wasted words. It includes the HTTP method, endpoint, and a clear action. Perfectly concise and front-loaded.

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?

For a simple one-parameter read operation with readOnly annotation, the description is sufficient. It doesn't mention the response shape, but without an output schema and given the simplicity, this is a minor gap. The description is complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 coverage is 100% and the id parameter's description already explains its meaning. The tool description's 'unique ID' adds no additional semantics beyond 'the ID of the survey to retrieve.' Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the parameter documentation.

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 a specific action: 'Retrieve a single satisfaction survey by its unique ID.' It uses a specific verb (retrieve), resource (satisfaction survey), and scope (single by ID), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_satisfaction_surveys or create_satisfaction_survey.

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 when to use the tool: when you have a specific ID and need a single survey. While it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, the context is clear and the sibling list tool is obviously different in purpose. A slightly more explicit note about using list_satisfaction_surveys for retrieving multiple surveys would earn a 5.

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