superops_clients_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. 'Get' implies a read-only operation, and 'detailed information' suggests the return is a rich client object. However, it does not disclose what happens for an invalid/unknown accountId, rate limits, or the exact fields returned.

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 one short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word adds clarity about the target and lookup key.

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 single-required-parameter read tool with full schema coverage, the description is nearly complete: the agent can correctly call it with accountId. The only gap is that 'detailed information' does not enumerate the returned fields, and there is no output schema to fill that gap.

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 input schema covers 100% of the parameter with 'The unique account ID of the client,' so the baseline is 3. The description only restates the accountId parameter ('by their account ID') without adding format, source, or validation details.

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 clear verb and resource: 'Get detailed information for a specific client.' The qualifier 'specific client' and 'by their account ID' help separate it from collection-style siblings like clients_list and clients_search, though it does not name those alternatives explicitly.

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?

It states a definite context: use this when you have a client's account ID and need detailed information for that one client. It does not mention exclusion criteria or the list/search siblings, but the precondition is clear from the phrase 'by their account ID.'

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