Get segment

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: the return includes the full filter condition tree, and the recommended scenario is read-before-edit. It does not cover error behavior for a missing/invalid segment id, which keeps it below a 5.

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?

Four short labeled lines covering purpose, exclusion, return, and trigger. Front-loaded with the purpose, zero filler, and the labeled structure makes scanning trivial for an agent.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description supplies what is needed: what it returns (the full record including the condition tree) and when to use it. Exact response fields remain unspecified, but given the tool's simplicity that is a minor gap rather than a blocker.

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?

Only one parameter ('id'), and schema description coverage is 100% ('Segment UUID'), so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description adds no format, prefix, or lookup detail beyond the schema. Per the rubric, a 3 is the correct baseline when the schema is complete.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Fetch one segment in full, including its filter condition tree'), which is far more precise than the title 'Get segment'. It also explicitly names the adjacent sibling it is not for (plunk_list_segment_contacts) and, by implication, the summary-list tool. An agent can distinguish it from the other ~10 segment tools without opening a schema.

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?

Provides an explicit 'Use when' scenario (diagnosing why a segment matches, prior to editing its filter) and an explicit 'Not for' exclusion routing to plunk_list_segment_contacts. Both the selection condition and the boundary case are stated, leaving nothing to inference.

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