get_subunit

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. 'Get' implies a safe read-only operation without side effects, and the description conveys that. However, it doesn't disclose what 'detailed information' includes, potential error cases (e.g., invalid organization number), or any rate limits, so it adds limited insight beyond the tool name and schema.

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 that states the verb, resource, and lookup criterion without any filler. Every word contributes to the meaning, making it highly efficient.

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 retrieval tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate. It clearly identifies the tool's purpose and input. It doesn't enumerate the returned fields, but 'detailed information' is a reasonable generic description for a getter, and the sibling tool list provides context for what 'subunit' might encompass.

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% coverage for the single parameter 'organizationNumber' with a description stating 'Organization number (9 digits)'. The description repeats the parameter's role but doesn't add extra meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline for well-documented parameters.

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 the action ('Get'), the resource ('detailed information about a specific subunit'), and the lookup key ('by organization number'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_company (which targets companies) and search_subunits (which searches rather than retrieves a specific subunit).

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 provides clear context: use this tool when you have an organization number and need specific subunit details. It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives or name when to prefer search_subunits, but the 'by organization number' phrasing makes the usage scenario unambiguous.

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