Get EV input configuration by ID

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, covering safety. The description adds no extra behavioral context such as return format, errors, or authentication requirements. It merely restates the operation without enriching what annotations already convey.

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, front-loaded sentence with no fluff. It is appropriately concise for a simple getter, though it could be slightly more informative without sacrificing brevity.

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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, read-only annotations), the description is minimally adequate but lacks essential context: what an EV input configuration is, what the response looks like, and how config_id relates to other tools. The absence of an output schema increases the need for description-level clarity, which is not provided.

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% for the single parameter config_id. The description does not explain what config_id represents, its format, or how to discover valid values (e.g., from the list tool). It adds no meaning beyond the parameter name itself.

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 'Get a specific EV input configuration' uses a clear verb and resource, and 'specific' implies retrieval by ID, distinguishing it from the list sibling. However, it does not explicitly state 'by ID' (the title does) or reference sibling tools, so it lacks strong differentiation.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as cymulate_ev_input_configs_list. It gives no context on how to obtain config_id or when a get is appropriate, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name.

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