sigma_get_source_swap_policy

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds no extra behavioral context beyond the one-line statement, which is acceptable given the annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is concise, though arguably too minimal, but it earns its place by stating the core action.

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 operation with an output schema and annotations, the description is minimally sufficient. However, it lacks explicit connection to the policy_id parameter and does not differentiate from the list sibling, leaving some contextual gaps.

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 one parameter, policy_id, with title 'Policy Id' and type string, which is self-explanatory. The description adds no param information, and with 0% schema coverage it should compensate, but the single simple parameter mitigates the gap.

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 'Get a source swap policy' clearly states the verb 'get' and the resource 'source swap policy', indicating a single-policy retrieval. It distinguishes from the sibling 'list_source_swap_policies' via singular vs. plural, though not explicitly.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites like obtaining the policy_id from a list operation, or any context for when a source swap policy would be needed.

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