app_encryption_declarations__app_encryption_declaration_d_0az88b

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds only that it's a GET endpoint, providing no additional behavioral context (e.g., authentication requirements, data freshness). It does not contradict 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 a single sentence plus the endpoint reference. No redundancy or filler. Every word adds value.

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?

The description explains what the tool does but does not describe the output format or content of the document. Since there is no output schema, this omission leaves the agent uncertain about the return type. Adequate but not complete.

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 has 100% coverage, describing the single 'id' parameter as 'Resource identifier.' The description adds minimal context by stating it's 'for an app encryption declaration,' which reinforces the parameter's purpose. Given schema coverage, baseline is 3.

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 the app encryption declaration document, distinguishing it from sibling tools like app_encryption_declarations__get (which gets the declaration itself) and app_encryption_declaration_documents__get (which likely gets documents at a different level). The verb 'Read' and resource 'app encryption declaration document' are specific.

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 for reading a document after having the declaration ID, but does not explicitly state when to use it vs. alternatives like app_encryption_declaration_documents__get. No when-not or exclusions provided.

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