Get IITR AIS Feature

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a read operation. The description adds that it resolves a single item, which is consistent and slightly extends behavioral understanding. However, it omits any mention of error behavior (e.g., unresolved identifier), return format, or side effects beyond the read-only nature.

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 wasted words. It efficiently conveys the tool's core action and scope, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, read-only, no nested objects) and the presence of annotations covering safety, the description is largely complete. However, the absence of an output schema means the agent must infer return data from the description alone; mentioning that the output provides details about the resolved feature would improve completeness.

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 input schema provides no description for the 'identifier' parameter (0% coverage). The description compensates by explaining that the identifier can be an endpoint symbol, alias, URL, or dashboard route, giving meaningful semantic context to the parameter that the schema lacks.

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 verb 'resolve' and the resource specification 'one endpoint symbol/alias/URL or one dashboard route' clearly indicate the function. It distinguishes from siblings like ais_list_features (which lists all features) and ais_get_portal_route (which likely resolves a different type). However, the term 'feature' remains slightly ambiguous without broader context.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ais_list_features or ais_get_portal_route. The description lacks conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer appropriateness solely from the name and minimal description.

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