Custom Attributes: Get a custom attribute details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds the auth requirement (User API key via `api-access-token` header), which is real context beyond the annotations, but says nothing about errors, response shape, or rate limits.

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 purpose is correctly front-loaded and the endpoint plus auth line are compact. The final sentence about Persian text and digits being "sent unchanged" is about writes and does not earn its place for a GET-by-ID tool, so the description carries irrelevant weight.

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?

With only 2 fully documented parameters, complete annotations, and no output schema, the definition is functional but thin. Since no output schema exists, the description would ideally say what a custom attribute definition contains; it omits this entirely.

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%, so the schema already documents both `id` and `account_id`; baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema (and the trailing Persian/Arabic-Indic digit note concerns written values, not this read operation).

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 and resource ("Get a custom attribute definition by ID") and scopes it to a single entity, which distinguishes it from the list/add/update/remove custom-attribute siblings. However, it does not name any sibling or explain the relationship to gapify_list_custom_attributes, so the differentiation is inferred rather than explicit.

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 "by ID" phrasing implies the tool is for retrieving one known attribute rather than browsing, and the required `id` parameter reinforces this. But there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer list_custom_attributes, and no stated prerequisites.

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