ghl_voice_ai_get_agent

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It simply states the operation type without disclosing behavior such as error conditions, permissions, or response format. For a simple get, some transparency is expected.

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, clear sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and easy to scan.

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?

Given the simplicity of a get-by-ID operation and full schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks any behavioral or error context, and with no output schema, the agent is left guessing about return values. Sibling tools exist but the description doesn't clarify the domain boundaries beyond the name.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, but the schema descriptions are adequate. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get a Voice AI agent by ID' uses a specific verb ('Get') and identifies the exact resource (Voice AI agent) and scope (by ID). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like ghl_voice_ai_get_agents (plural) and other get_agent tools for different AI types.

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 usage (retrieve a specific Voice AI agent by ID) but provides no explicit context about when to choose this over alternatives or any exclusions. It relies on the tool name for differentiation, which is not spelled out.

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