surveymonkey_get_question

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden, but it only says 'Returns the full definition', which largely restates the tool's purpose. It does not mention lookup constraints, error conditions, ownership requirements, or side-effect guarantees beyond the read-only implication of 'get'.

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 short and front-loaded with the main behavior. The Args section is somewhat redundant with the parameter names, but it does not bloat the definition.

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 straightforward three-ID getter, the description plus output schema is minimally viable. However, it is incomplete in providing usage context, alternative tool routing, or parameter semantics, so an agent is left to infer when and how to use it.

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 0%, so the description should compensate. The Args section only says 'Survey ID', 'Page ID', and 'Question ID', which mostly restates the parameter names and does not explain relationships, formats, or how the IDs are nested or required.

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 states a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('full definition of a question'), and notes that answer choices are included. This clearly differentiates it from sibling list/delete/update question tools and from get_page/get_survey.

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?

No guidance is given on when to call this tool versus list_questions, get_survey_details, or other siblings. The description provides no when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.

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