android_to_ios_app_mapping_details__get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, making the behavior clear. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond stating it's a GET request, which aligns with annotations.

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 extremely concise (11 words) with no wasted words. It front-loads the action 'Read one android to iOS app mapping detail by ID' and provides the endpoint path in brackets as supplementary info.

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 simple read tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is complete. It specifies what is being read and the identifier method, leaving no ambiguity for the agent.

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 schema has one parameter 'id' with a basic description. The description mentions 'by ID', reinforcing the parameter's role, but does not add format or constraints beyond what the schema provides. Schema coverage is 100%, so 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 clearly states the tool reads one android to iOS app mapping detail by ID, using the specific verb 'Read'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list (apps__android_to_ios_app_mapping_details__list) and other CRUD operations.

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 use when a single record ID is known and a read operation is needed. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives like the list tool, but the context is clear enough for a simple get-by-ID.

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