get_circle

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying the return shape and the inclusion of an initiator object, but does not go beyond that. No contradictions exist.

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 main purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by compact Args and Returns sections. The description is appropriately sized for a simple read operation and avoids filler, though the return field list is somewhat detailed.

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 single-parameter, read-only tool, the description is complete: it explains where the ID comes from holistically and what the response contains. With annotations and an output schema also available, nothing critical is missing for an agent to invoke this tool correctly.

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 0%, so the description carries the full burden for parameter explanation. It does this well by explaining what circle_id is, where to get it, and providing a concrete example. This adds substantial meaning beyond the schema's bare 'Circle Id' title.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get full details of a circle.' It also narrows the behavior by including the current user's membership info, which differentiates it from list-only or search circle tools. The purpose is immediately clear and distinct from sibling tools.

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 gives clear context by identifying the exact source of the required parameter: 'the hash from list_circles.' It implies this tool is for retrieving a single circle's full details by ID, though it does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives like search_circles or list_circles.

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