stackoverflow_question_details

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It adequately discloses that the tool is read-only (getting details), but does not mention potential behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication requirements, or response size. The description is not contradictory but lacks depth.

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, clear sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and efficiently conveys the tool's purpose, earning high marks for conciseness.

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 the low complexity (3 parameters, no output schema) and that the schema fully documents parameters, the description is contextually complete. It covers the core purpose and key optional features (answers, comments), leaving no critical gaps.

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 100%, and the description adds minimal extra value (e.g., 'including answers' matches the 'includeAnswers' parameter). The description does not clarify parameter formats or constraints beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline without adding much.

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's function: 'Get detailed information about a specific Stack Overflow question including answers'. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Stack Overflow question'), and the name distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'search_stackoverflow' and 'stackoverflow_tags'.

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 when a specific question ID is known, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'search_stackoverflow' for finding questions). No exclusions or when-not-to-use scenarios are mentioned.

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