get_service

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It communicates that the operation is a retrieval ('Get') and reveals included data, but it does not explicitly state read-only behavior, error conditions, or auth requirements. This is adequate for a simple getter but leaves some traits implicit.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence conveys the action, target, lookup key, and return contents with no filler. Every word earns its place.

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 retrieval with no output schema, the description adequately names the key fields returned. It does not explain the structure of formConfig or delivery steps, but that is likely acceptable for the tool's complexity; the core selection and invocation information is present.

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% for the single parameter, and the description's 'id or slug' matches the schema exactly. The description does not add format, example, or precedence details beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('Get'), a specific resource ('a single Meridian service'), and the lookup key ('id or slug'), and it names returned content ('formConfig and delivery steps'). This clearly distinguishes it from list_services (plural) and get_service_request (a different resource type).

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 clearly implies use when a single service's full configuration is needed rather than a list. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but 'single' and the presence of list_services provide enough contextual routing.

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