get_fund

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses the content of the returned data (performance, AUM, commitments, investments, news), which is helpful. However, it does not mention authentication requirements, error behavior, or explicitly state that the operation is read-only, though 'Get' implies it.

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?

One concise sentence with the action and resource front-loaded, followed by specific content types. No filler or redundant phrasing. It earns its place, though it could arguably be even more compact without the list.

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 single-parameter lookup tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the core purpose and indicates the data to expect. It does not detail the response structure or error conditions, but the parameter is fully documented in the schema, and the tool's purpose is clear.

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 100% and the schema already provides a rich description for the uuid parameter ('The entity UUID (profile UUID from a list result)'). The description simply repeats 'by UUID', adding no new meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 a specific verb ('Get'), resource ('fund detail'), and key identifier ('by UUID'), and enumerates the data categories returned (performance, AUM, commitments, investments, news). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_funds (search vs lookup) and get_person (fund vs person).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The phrase 'by UUID' implies it is for retrieving a known fund, and the schema's parameter description ('profile UUID from a list result') hints at a search-then-get workflow, but this is implied rather than stated in the tool description.

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