get_detection

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It usefully reveals that weather context is conditional ('if recorded') and that media URLs are returned as URLs only, not bytes. It doesn't mention read-only behavior, auth, or error conditions, but the getter nature and output schema mitigate that gap.

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 purpose is front-loaded in a single sentence, followed by a compact Args list. Every sentence adds value, with no redundancy or padding.

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 only two parameters, an output schema, and a clearly singular purpose, the description is sufficient. The weather-context caveat prevents false expectations, and the 'single detection' wording makes the contrast with sibling tools evident.

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 0%, and the description fully compensates: detection_id is explained as 'the detection's numeric id,' and include_media_urls is clarified as returning URLs for the audio clip and spectrogram, explicitly excluding bytes. This adds real meaning beyond the bare schema types.

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 specific verb 'Get' and object 'full details for a single detection,' including weather context. The singular scope clearly distinguishes it from sibling plural tools like get_detections and search_detections.

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 phrase 'for a single detection' provides clear context for when to use this tool versus the plural/list siblings. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the singleton scope is a strong situational pointer.

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