ticket_details

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Retrieve', implying read-only, but lacks details on side effects, permissions, error handling, or rate limits. The list of data types is informative but does not describe behavioral traits.

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 sentence that efficiently lists all data categories, front-loading the core purpose. No wasted words; every part adds value.

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 no output schema and three parameters (one enum), the description adequately enumerates the possible actions and their return types. However, it lacks structural details of the response (e.g., format), which is acceptable due to the clear mapping between actions and data types.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds a high-level summary of what each action returns, but it does not provide details beyond the schema, making it marginally helpful. No parameter semantics are elaborated beyond the schema descriptions.

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 tool retrieves detailed ticket information and lists specific data categories (fields, texts, snapshots, etc.), using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings 'tickets' (list) and 'ticket_stats' (statistics) by focusing on a single ticket's details.

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 use for accessing details of a specific ticket, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus siblings or provide exclusions. No alternatives are mentioned beyond the implied differentiation.

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