get_csa_table

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the response includes table content in HTML format, which is helpful context, but it does not mention permissions, error behavior, or whether the HTML is sanitized/rendered. 'Retrieve' implies read-only but adds no further 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, front-loaded sentence that communicates the core action and a key response detail without any filler. Every word earns its place.

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?

Without an output schema, the description at least discloses that the response contains table content in HTML format. However, 'details' remains vague, and it does not enumerate what other fields are returned. For a simple two-parameter retrieval tool, this is mostly sufficient but could be more explicit.

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% for the two simple parameters. The description does not add additional meaning beyond stating 'single CSA table', which is already implied by the 'id' parameter. The schema already explains the parameters adequately.

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 uses a specific verb 'Retrieve' and a clear resource 'details of a single CSA table', which distinguishes it from sibling list tools. The parenthetical about HTML content further clarifies the scope of the response.

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 implies this tool is for fetching one CSA table by ID and domain, but it does not explicitly mention when to use it over list_csa_tables or other retrieval tools. No exclusions or alternative names are provided.

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