subscription_offer_code_custom_codes_get_instance

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, and it delivers almost nothing. The 'GET' verb weakly signals a read-only operation, but there is no mention of authorization requirements, rate limits, error behavior, or response shape for what is a mutation-adjacent API surface.

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?

It is short, but it is not front-loaded with anything useful and the parenthetical simply repeats the path verbatim, so the text contains redundant material rather than earning each token. Brevity here reflects under-specification, not discipline.

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 GET-instance tool with four parameters and no output schema, the description should at minimum identify the resource being fetched. It gives no indication of what a subscriptionOfferCodeCustomCode is, so an agent cannot confidently distinguish it from the many similar offer-code tools.

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 100% and all four parameters (id, include, and the two fields_* sparse-fieldset params) are documented in the schema itself, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond echoing '{id}' from the path, which the schema already covers.

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 is nothing more than the raw REST path 'GET /v1/subscriptionOfferCodeCustomCodes/{id}' repeated twice in parentheses. It implicitly conveys a single-resource read by id, but it never states in words what the resource is or what the tool returns, and the duplication is pure noise rather than clarification.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer this over the sibling subscription_offer_codes_custom_codes_get_to_many_relationship or subscription_offer_code_custom_codes_update_instance, and no prerequisites. The agent is left to infer everything from the path.

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