IndividualClassesGetDetail

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description is consistent with them. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations, such as not-found behavior, response shape, or authorization expectations. There is no contradiction.

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 one short sentence with key information front-loaded. There is minor redundancy between 'single' and 'individual', but overall it is concise and easy to parse.

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-only lookup, the description plus annotations and schema are sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool. It does not describe the return value in detail, but no output schema exists and 'details' adequately signals the result.

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 already covers 100% of the single parameter with 'integer (optional)'. The description's 'by id' clarifies that classId is the class identifier, but it adds no detail about format, defaults, or behavior when the parameter is omitted.

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 is specific and unambiguous: 'Get details of a single individual class by id' names the verb, resource, and scope. It clearly distinguishes this from list, create, update, and delete siblings in the IndividualClasses group.

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 'single ... by id' phrasing implies this tool is for retrieving exactly one individual class, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer it over alternatives like IndividualClassesGetList. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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