brand_truth_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the behavior of the detail parameter by listing exact fields for short and medium, and describing full as raw with full content. This gives the agent a good sense of what to expect in the response, though it does not address error cases or permissions.

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, information-dense sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose and then efficiently enumerates the detail level differences, earning its 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?

For a simple get tool with no output schema, the description provides a reasonable outline of the return values for short and medium, and indicates full contains raw content. It is not exhaustive (e.g., 'raw' is left somewhat ambiguous), but it covers the essential behaviors needed to select the 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?

Although the schema covers 100% of the parameters, the description adds value by concretizing what each detail level returns: short has specific fields, medium adds specific fields, and full includes the complete body. The schema only describes the enum values abstractly, so this extra detail is helpful.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch a single brand truth by ID.' It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like brand_truth_list by emphasizing 'single' and 'by ID.' The mention of detail levels adds further clarity about the tool's scope.

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 this tool: when you need a single brand truth by ID. It explains the detail levels and explicitly recommends detail='full' for retrieving the complete content body. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives (e.g., brand_truth_list), relying on the purpose to imply the contrast.

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