zendesk_get_view

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

The description discloses what the tool returns (JSON with specific fields) and implies it is a read-only operation. There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does not mention authorization or rate limits, but for a simple get operation, it provides sufficient transparency.

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 concise: two sentences that first state the action and scope, then list returned fields. It is front-loaded and has no unnecessary words.

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, no nested objects) and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It covers the purpose, key returned fields, and implies the single required parameter.

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 input schema has one parameter (view_id) without a description. The tool description does not explicitly describe the parameter, though it is implied by the tool's purpose. Since schema coverage is 0%, the description could add more value but the parameter is self-explanatory.

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 it retrieves a Zendesk view's definition, including filter conditions and execution settings. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like zendesk_get_view_tickets (which returns tickets of a view) and zendesk_list_views (which lists views).

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. While the purpose is clear, there is no guidance on when to prefer this over related tools like zendesk_get_view_tickets or zendesk_list_views. Usage is implied but not explicit.

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