get_guest

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the return fields (email, capabilities, items shared), which is helpful, but does not state that the operation is read-only, nor does it mention potential errors (e.g., guest not found) or authorization requirements beyond the enterprise plan.

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 that immediately conveys the tool's purpose and output. Every word is necessary, and there is no redundant information.

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 retrieval tool with only two parameters and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers the action, resource, output fields, and plan restriction. However, it lacks details on error handling or behavior when the guest does not exist, which could be useful for an agent.

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% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds that the guest_id is the 'numeric id', which aligns with the schema. It does not provide additional context beyond what the schema already offers, thus the description adds marginal value.

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 the action (Get), the resource (guest's details by id), and specifies the output fields (email, capabilities, items shared). It also adds the enterprise plan restriction. This distinguishes it from other guest-related tools like edit_guest or invite_guest.

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 mentions 'Enterprise plan only', which provides a usage condition. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., listing guests or searching). The name and sibling tools imply retrieval, but explicit guidance is lacking.

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