get_custom_field_options

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does so well by implying a read-only lookup, specifying supported field types, listing returned fields, and explaining that option Text is the value stored in DataMart customFields. It does not discuss permissions, error behavior, or pagination, but for a simple lookup the key behavioral context is present.

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 front-loaded with the core action, then lists supported types and return fields compactly. Every sentence adds useful information without waste.

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?

Although there is no output schema, the description explicitly lists the return fields and explains the important DataMart customFields semantic. Together with the fully documented input schema, this gives the agent enough context to invoke the tool correctly.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces that customFieldBaseId must come from get_custom_fields, but it adds limited additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 and resource: get the selectable options of a dropdown custom field. It names the supported field types (RYGList, DropDownList, List) and distinguishes this from get_custom_fields by requiring the BaseId returned there.

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?

It clearly establishes the prerequisite that the BaseId comes from get_custom_fields, so the agent knows this tool is used after retrieving custom fields. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is strong for this narrow lookup tool.

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