get_reminder

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It simply says 'get details' without addressing read-only guarantees, permissions, response format, or any side effects. The term 'get' implies a read operation, but this is not explicitly confirmed or elaborated.

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, concise sentence that efficiently communicates the core purpose without any fluff or redundant information. 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is still under-specified. It lacks usage context, behavioral details, and any acknowledgment of sibling tools, leaving the agent with insufficient information to determine when and how to invoke this tool appropriately.

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 already fully describes the only parameter 'id' as 'The reminder UUID' (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning or context about the parameter beyond what the schema 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 'Get details of a payment reminder' clearly states the verb (get) and resource (payment reminder), making the primary purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from siblings like list_reminders by focusing on a single entity, though it does not explicitly contrast with them.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The required 'id' parameter implies you need a specific reminder UUID, but there is no mention of prerequisites, alternatives (e.g., list_reminders), or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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