Get question details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds non-obvious behavioral details beyond the annotations: a hard cap of 50 locales returned and max_options options per locale, plus the presence of totals, which tells the agent results can be truncated.

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?

Two compact sentences that front-load the returned content and then the truncation limits; little waste. It leans toward describing outputs rather than action, but stays tightly scoped.

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 two-parameter getter with no output schema and annotations covering safety, the description does the important work of outlining the return shape (label, field type, options/ranges) and the 50-locale and per-locale option caps. Only error/invalid-id behavior is left unaddressed.

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%, with both question_id and max_options fully documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description restates that max_options applies per locale but adds no new syntax, format, or edge-case semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 conveys a specific resource and scope: the presentation of one question, per locale, including label, HTML field type, and answer options/ranges. The verb is implicit ('How one question is presented') rather than an explicit 'Get/Retrieve', and it does not name or distinguish itself from the sibling list_supporter_questions, though the question_id pointer implies the relationship.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as list_supporter_questions. An agent must infer from the name and the question_id description that this fetches a single question previously obtained from a listing call.

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