Get lead

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get' clearly communicates a non-mutating read operation, and 'by id' indicates the selection mechanism. Still, it does not disclose error behavior, authorization requirements, or response shape, leaving some behavioral details implicit.

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 with no filler or redundant phrasing. It immediately conveys the essential operation and is appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter lookup tool.

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 one-parameter read operation, this definition is workable: the resource, ID parameter, and read semantics are clear. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves return format and edge-case behavior to the agent's assumptions, making it 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 only defines leadId as a required string; the description's 'by id' tells the agent that leadId is the identifier used to look up the lead. This adds a bit of meaning beyond the schema, but the description does not provide format, source, or additional constraints, and schema description coverage is 0%.

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 specific action ('Get'), a resource ('a single lead'), and the lookup method ('by id'). This makes it clear that the tool retrieves one lead rather than listing leads, and it is distinguishable from siblings like gambot_list_leads and gambot_get_lead_fields, though it does not name them explicitly.

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 usage context is implied: use this when you have a specific lead ID and need that single lead. However, the description gives no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance or alternatives, so the agent must infer the appropriate choice from the name and schema.

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