pmg_tracker_detail

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses validation behavior (path-segment-safe checking), parameter mapping (Unix epoch to query params), and config requirements, providing strong insight into tool operation.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then prerequisites and technical details. Efficient but somewhat dense; could benefit from slight restructuring for readability.

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?

Covers validation, mapping, and prerequisites. Output schema exists so return values are not required. Missing error cases or pagination details, but adequate for a retrieval tool.

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?

Adds significant meaning beyond the schema: explains id_ validation rules, maps start/end to query parameters, and mentions config dependency; only 20% schema coverage, but description compensates thoroughly.

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?

Clearly states the tool retrieves tracking detail for a specific mail ID, marked as a read operation. Distinguishes from sibling pmg_tracker_list by specifying 'for a specific mail ID'.

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?

Explicitly mentions prerequisite (PROXIMO_PMG_* config) and implies usage for a single ID, but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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