get_funder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states 'Get metadata', omitting key behavioral traits such as idempotency, read-only nature, potential errors, or authentication requirements. This is insufficient for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 concise with two sentences and a concrete example. It is front-loaded with the purpose. However, it could slightly expand on parameter details without losing conciseness, justifying a 4 rather than 5.

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 has an output schema (context signal), the description need not detail return values. For a simple get tool with one parameter, the description is minimally adequate but lacks guidance on usage context relative to siblings and behavioral expectations, leaving it at a baseline 3.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate. It adds 'Funder Registry ID' via example but does not elaborate on the expected format, constraints, or valid values for 'funder_id', providing little additional meaning beyond the schema's type declaration.

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 clearly states 'Get metadata for a single funder', specifying the verb (Get), resource (metadata for a funder), and scope (single). It distinguishes from the sibling 'list_funders' which retrieves multiple funders.

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 indicates use with a specific Funder Registry ID via the example. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, the contrasting sibling 'list_funders' implies this is for individual lookups, providing adequate context for an AI agent.

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