Get Suppression

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosure, yet it says nothing about what happens when the ID/email is not found, whether the suppression record includes status/timestamps, or what the response shape is. A read-only getter is low risk, but an agent gets no behavioral context at all.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource and followed by the identifying keys. There is no filler text to remove.

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 one-parameter getter with a fully documented schema, the basics are covered. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the description should at least say what is returned and how a not-found case surfaces.

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% and the single parameter already documents 'Suppression ID (sup_xxx) or email address'. The description restates the ID-or-email dual key but adds no format details, fallback behavior, or precedence rule beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Retrieve a single suppression') and the lookup keys (ID or email address), which distinguishes it from list-suppressions and create-suppression. It stops short of naming those siblings explicitly, so differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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 on when to use this over list-suppressions, or when a lookup by email is preferable to ID. The word 'single' hints at the boundary with list tools, but no condition or prerequisite is given.

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