Base Wework Get Department

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only mentions 'view detailed information' and does not disclose any behavioral traits like authentication requirements, response format, pagination, or side effects (though it is a read operation). The lack of detail leaves the agent guessing about what happens on success or failure.

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 a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the key action. It is appropriately short for a simple get-by-id tool, though it could benefit from a bit more substance without becoming verbose.

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?

For a straightforward read tool with an output schema (true), the description is minimal but arguably sufficient to convey the basic operation. However, it lacks any usage context, error handling hints, or notes about required authentication, which would be helpful for an agent to use it correctly in a real workflow.

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 does not explain the parameters. The 'id' parameter is self-evident from the tool name and schema, but the optional 'access_token' is not mentioned at all. The description adds no semantic value beyond the raw schema.

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 the action (view) and resource (department details on Base Wework), and is specific enough to distinguish it from siblings like base_wework_list_departments (listing) and base_wework_remove_department (deletion). It conveys a precise purpose.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as base_wework_list_departments for browsing all departments. The description simply says 'view details' without indicating prerequisites or contexts where this tool is preferred.

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