get_custom_field_dropdown_options

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden, but it only states what is fetched. It does not disclose whether this is a read-only lookup, permission requirements, or whether the returned options are filtered by anything (e.g., active values).

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?

A single, appropriately sized sentence with the resource and scope front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though it sacrifices explanatory depth for brevity.

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 one-parameter read tool this is roughly adequate, but with no output schema the agent gets no notion of the returned option structure (labels, values, grouping by field). Given no annotations either, a little more context would materially help.

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% with a single enumerated entityType parameter, so the schema already documents the input fully. The description's phrase 'of a specific entity type' merely echoes that, adding no format or selection semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb (Get) and resource (dropdown options for custom fields) scoped to an entity type, so the agent understands what it returns. However, it does not distinguish this from the sibling list_custom_field_definitions, leaving the boundary between 'definitions' and 'dropdown options' to inference.

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?

There is no indication of when to use this tool versus list_custom_field_definitions or any other sibling, nor any prerequisite stated. The agent must guess the intended situation from the name alone.

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