fiken_get_offer_draft

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get a specific offer draft by ID' without mentioning read-only nature, authentication requirements, or what the response contains (e.g., full details). This is insufficient for a retrieval tool.

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 short sentence, which is concise but lacks any structure or additional detail. It is not verbose, but it is too minimal to be considered well-structured. Every word is necessary, but the description could benefit from more context.

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 no output schema, the description should hint at what is returned (e.g., full offer draft details). It does not, nor does it mention any specific fields or related tools. For a simple get-by-ID tool, it is somewhat lacking.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters (draftId: 'Draft ID', companySlug: 'Company slug identifier...'). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses 'Get a specific offer draft by ID', clearly indicating the action (get) and resource (offer draft). It distinguishes from siblings like fiken_get_offer (non-draft) and fiken_list_offer_drafts (list all). However, it does not explain what an offer draft is, leaving some ambiguity.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It is implied that one should use it when they have a draft ID, but no mention of when not to use it or reference to sibling tools like fiken_list_offer_drafts for obtaining IDs.

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