get_quote

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action ('Get') without any details on permissions required, rate limits, error handling, or response format. For a retrieval tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly. Every word earns its place by conveying essential information without 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks behavioral details (e.g., what happens if the ID is invalid), doesn't explain the return value, and provides minimal parameter guidance. With no annotations and low schema coverage, it should do more to be fully helpful.

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 description mentions 'by ID', which aligns with the 'quote_id' parameter in the schema, but schema description coverage is 0%, so the parameter is undocumented. The description adds minimal semantic context (it's an ID) but doesn't specify format, constraints, or examples, failing to compensate for the low coverage.

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 specific quote by ID' clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('quote'), and specifies retrieval by identifier. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_quotes' (plural) by emphasizing a single quote. However, it doesn't fully differentiate from other 'get_' tools that also retrieve specific resources by ID (e.g., 'get_project'), making it slightly less specific.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid quote ID), contrast with 'get_quotes' for listing multiple quotes, or specify error conditions. The description implies usage for a known quote ID but lacks explicit context or exclusions.

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