get_quote

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the tool is readonly (via tier tag) and maps to a GraphQL query, which implies safety and structure. However, it does not describe behavior on invalid IDs, error handling, or any side effects. It provides some context but not comprehensive transparency.

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 extremely concise: one sentence plus a tag. Every element serves a purpose: what it does ('Get a single quote by ID'), technical backing ('Maps to the GraphQL `quote` query'), and permissions context ('[tier: readonly-owner]'). No redundant words.

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 the tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is largely complete. It covers purpose, technical detail, and permission model. Missing are behaviors on missing IDs or pagination, but for a single-resource retrieval tool, these are minor gaps. The sibling tools help contextualize its role.

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%, with both parameters described. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, only mentioning the GraphQL query mapping which indirectly informs the 'fields' parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 clearly states it gets a single quote by ID, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'list_quotes' tool by focusing on a single entity retrieval, and the mention of the GraphQL `quote` query adds specificity.

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 implies usage when you have a specific quote ID, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_quotes'. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned. The context from sibling tools provides implicit guidance, but the description itself lacks direct usage instructions.

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