get_trigger

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds value by specifying 'full configuration' and 'including filters'. No contradictions.

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?

Single efficient sentence followed by a structured parameter list. Front-loaded with purpose, no fluff, every sentence earns its place.

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 presence of an output schema, the description doesn't need to explain return values. It covers inputs, purpose, and provides lookup hints, making it fully complete for a read tool with rich schema.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description compensates by explaining each parameter: account_id and container_id can be numeric or full resource path; workspace_id and trigger_id are numeric with lookup hints. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's anyOf type.

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 'Gets the full configuration of one trigger, including filters', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like list_triggers (which lists triggers) and get_tag (for tags).

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 when to use (to get a single trigger's configuration) and provides lookup hints for IDs via list_workspaces and list_triggers. It doesn't explicitly exclude other cases but is clear enough.

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