get_term_detail

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns detailed information including descriptions, category, synonyms, and related terms, and mentions support for Korean names. It does not mention any side effects, authentication, or error handling, but the tool is a simple read operation, so this is adequate.

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 well-structured with an introductory sentence, an important note, and clear Args/Returns sections. It is concise but includes useful examples. Could be slightly more terse, but overall effective.

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 and the existence of an output schema (so return format details are not needed), the description covers purpose, usage, parameter details, and what the output contains. It is complete enough for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It thoroughly explains the single parameter 'term_id_or_name' by listing acceptable values (unique ID, English name, Korean name) with concrete examples, adding significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 it retrieves detailed information about a specific shipbuilding term. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling 'search_ship_terms' by noting it should be called after that for full details, and provides an example with Korean names.

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 explicit guidance: 'Call this after search_ship_terms() to get FULL details.' It also offers examples for Korean names and describes the acceptable input types (ID, English name, Korean name), helping the agent decide when to use this tool.

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