catalog_get_policy

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds the concrete endpoint (a 'private' pricing-cards path), hinting at authenticated access, but says nothing about error behavior when an unknown id is passed or what the returned card contains.

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?

It is short and front-loaded, but the first two sentences restate the same fact ('find ... with specified Id' / 'returns ... with the specified id') plus a raw endpoint, so a third of the text is redundant.

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?

With no output schema, the description is the only place to characterize the returned pricing card, and it merely repeats the tool name. The policy-versus-pricing-card naming mismatch is left unexplained, which is a real ambiguity for an agent picking among many catalog and policy tools.

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 coverage is 100% and the single id parameter is fully documented with type and '(path)' annotation, so the description adds nothing beyond 'specified Id'. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the semantics.

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 ('Find/Returns the pricing card with specified Id'), so the operation is unambiguous. However, it never reconciles the tool name 'catalog_get_policy' with the described 'pricing card' resource, and it does not differentiate itself from siblings like catalog_get_policies.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this lookup versus catalog_get_policies or the metering/assignment tools, and no stated prerequisites. The agent must infer from the name alone that this is the single-item variant.

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