apps__alternative_distribution_key__get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the description doesn't need to restate safety. It adds the endpoint path and the 'for an app' scope, but doesn't disclose additional behavioral details like response format or error conditions. This is adequate given the annotation coverage, but not rich.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the action and resource. It includes the endpoint for precise identification without any wasted words.

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 operation with one well-documented parameter and strong annotations, the description is nearly complete. It could optionally mention what the returned key looks like, but 'Read the alternative distribution key' sufficiently implies the return value. The lack of an output schema is not a significant gap here.

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 fully describes the only parameter 'id' with the useful hint 'ID from the matching list call.' The description itself adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('the alternative distribution key for an app'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like alternative_distribution_keys__get by scoping it to an app. The included endpoint [GET /v1/apps/{id}/alternativeDistributionKey] further reinforces the exact operation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as alternative_distribution_keys__get or alternative_distribution_keys__list. It only states what the tool does, not the scenarios or prerequisites for using it.

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