get_source

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read-only intent through 'Get,' but it says nothing about response shape, error behavior, permissions, rate limits, or side effects. This is minimal behavioral transparency.

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 one short sentence that is immediately understandable, front-loaded, and free of filler. Every word earns its place, even though the overall content is thin.

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 one-parameter retrieval tool, the description and schema are enough to construct a basic call. But with no output schema and no annotations, the agent gets little context about what 'details' it will receive, what a 'source' means in this API, or how get_source relates to sibling tools. The description is minimally 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 schema exposes only source_id (integer, required) with zero description coverage. The description's phrase 'a specific source' only weakly connects source_id to the resource; it does not explain how to obtain a valid source_id, what the identifier references, or any constraints. This does not meaningfully compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Get details for a specific source.' The word 'specific' also signals that this is a singular-source lookup rather than a list operation like the sibling get_sources. It is not vague, but it does not specify what kinds of details are returned, so it stops short of a fuller specification.

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 intended use is implied: if you need details for one particular source, use this tool. However, there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of alternatives such as get_sources for listing all sources. The context is inferred rather than stated.

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