GetFISExperiment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses no information about permissions, read-only nature, error behavior for invalid IDs, rate limits, or any other trait beyond the basic retrieval purpose.

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 front-loaded with a clear purpose statement, but the second sentence largely repeats the first ('detailed information' vs 'comprehensive information'), and the Args/Returns sections add little. It is not excessively long, but it contains redundancy.

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 tool, the description covers the basics but omits useful context: what 'experiment details' actually include, error handling, and any behavioral notes. Without annotations or an output schema, these gaps matter more.

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 100% description coverage for the single 'id' parameter, and the description merely restates it as 'The experiment ID to retrieve details for.' No additional meaning, format, or constraints are added beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Get detailed information about a specific experiment' and 'retrieves comprehensive information about a single FIS experiment identified by its ID.' The scope ('single FIS experiment') implicitly distinguishes it from ListFISExperiments, but no sibling is named 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?

The description implies usage by requiring an experiment ID and describing retrieval of a single experiment. However, it never states when to use this tool versus alternatives like ListFISExperiments or GetFISExperimentTemplate, nor does it list any exclusions or prerequisites.

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