get_subscription_monitor

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the result includes the latest stored result, which is useful, but it does not mention error behavior, authentication, or side effects. The 'Get' verb implies a read-only operation, but no deeper transparency is provided.

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, clearly worded sentence that immediately conveys the tool's action and key detail. No wasted words, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 one parameter and an output schema, the description is sufficient: it identifies the resource, the key behavior (latest stored result), and the selection mechanism. Some details like what a monitor is or where watch IDs come from are omitted, but sibling tool names and context fill in gaps.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that 'watch_id' is the identifier used to select the monitor, which adds some context beyond the raw schema, though it largely restates the parameter name and does not explain the format or origin of watch IDs.

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 verb ('Get'), resource ('monitor'), and identifier type ('watch ID'), and adds that it includes the latest stored result. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_subscription_monitors (which lists all) and remove_subscription_monitor (which deletes).

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 phrase 'by watch ID' clearly implies the tool is for retrieving a single, known monitor, as opposed to listing all monitors or running checks. While no explicit alternatives or exclusions are named, the context of a specific identifier provides clear usage context.

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