destination_details

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions that the tool returns a destination object, with no information about side effects, permissions, rate limits, or error handling. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the full impact of invocation.

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 consists of two clear, front-loaded sentences with no extraneous information. The second sentence is somewhat lengthy but well-structured. It is concise and efficient.

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?

Given that there is no output schema, the description should explain what fields the returned destination object contains or provide examples. It also omits error scenarios. For a simple lookup tool, this lacks sufficient completeness for an AI agent to confidently use it without additional references.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context for the 'destination_id' parameter (how to find it) but does not add meaning for 'schema_file' beyond what the schema already states. Overall, it meets the baseline but provides no extra semantic value.

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 returns a destination object given a valid identifier. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from similar tools like 'list_destinations' or 'connection_details', which could cause confusion for an agent selecting among many sibling tools.

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 specific guidance on when to use the tool (when a valid identifier is known) and includes an explicit method for obtaining that identifier via the List All Groups endpoint. It lacks explicit exclusion criteria (e.g., when not to use) but is generally clear.

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