Recurring Get Recurring Stream

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds no additional behavioral context, such as what happens if the stream isn't found or whether it returns raw data. However, it does not contradict annotations. Given annotations, the description is minimally adequate.

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?

Extremely short (3 words), but at the cost of informativeness. The description is under-specified and does not effectively use the space to convey important details.

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?

With 5 parameters, no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is highly incomplete. It fails to explain what a recurring stream is, what data is returned, or how to handle the parameters. This is insufficient for effective agent use.

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 40% (only fields and output_mode have descriptions). The tool description provides no parameter details, failing to compensate for the missing descriptions of recurring_id, session_path, and include_liabilities.

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 recurring stream' provides a verb and resource, but it is vague. It does not distinguish this tool from siblings like 'recurring_list_recurring_streams' or 'recurring_get_recurring_summary'. The required parameter 'recurring_id' implies it fetches a single stream, but the description doesn't clarify.

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 tool vs alternatives. The sibling list includes other recurring stream operations, but the description gives no context about using 'get' vs 'list' or 'summary'. An agent would lack direction.

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