Get exposure detail

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds no behavioral details beyond that—no mention of output format, errors, or permissions, so it fails to add value beyond the structured hints.

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 clear sentence with no redundant words or information. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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 one-parameter, read-only tool, the description is minimally adequate. However, with no output schema, it doesn't clarify what 'details' means or what fields are returned. The annotations fill some gaps, but the description remains vague about the actual data content.

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?

The schema only provides a string exposure_id with no description, and schema coverage is 0%. The description's 'specific exposure' suggests the parameter is the identifier, but gives no format, example, or guidance on where to obtain the ID. Minimal compensation for low schema coverage.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'exposure', with the qualifier 'specific' indicating single-item retrieval. It distinguishes from sibling tools like cymulate_ea_exposures_export and other get-tools, though not explicitly naming alternatives.

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 word 'specific' implies using this when you have an exposure_id, but there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this over export/list tools or any exclusions. The usage is only implied, not stated.

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