get_macro

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. However, 'Get macro details' only restates the tool name and does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, any permission requirements, or side effects. It adds no behavioral context beyond what the name implies.

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 one short sentence with no unnecessary words, earning its place by stating the tool's purpose. It is appropriately terse, though it sacrifices informational richness for brevity.

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 that the tool has a simple two-parameter schema and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate but fails to note the dependency on a queue key or how this differs from related macro tools. It lacks context that would help an agent understand the tool's role within the broader macro management workflow.

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 already documents both parameters (queue with 'Queue key' and macro_id with 'Macro ID') at 100% coverage. The description does not add any additional meaning, syntax, or format details beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline but provides no extra 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 'Get macro details' clearly identifies the action (get) and resource (macro), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_macros, create_macro, update_macro, and delete_macro. It is concise and unambiguous, though it doesn't elaborate on the specific scope or return content beyond 'details'.

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 no information about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_macros or get_macro with different parameters. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative tool recommendations, leaving the agent without guidance on selection.

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