Get VWO campaign goal

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows it's a safe read operation. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., what 'full configuration' entails, permissions, or side effects). With annotations covering safety, a score of 3 is acceptable.

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?

Single sentence, no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the main action. Could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) but remains efficient.

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?

No output schema, yet the description does not explain what the returned 'full configuration' contains (e.g., fields, structure). Given the tool returns data and has 4 parameters, this is a notable gap. Sibling tools exist for related operations, but no cross-referencing is 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 has 100% coverage with detailed parameter descriptions (e.g., how to obtain goalId). The tool description itself adds no extra semantics beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get the full configuration of one goal on a VWO campaign', specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like vwo_list_campaign_goals (which lists goals) and vwo_get_campaign (which gets a campaign).

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The parameter descriptions hint at prerequisites (e.g., call vwo_list_campaign_goals first), but the main description lacks context about when this tool is appropriate versus alternatives.

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