Get VWO campaign variation

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint: true and openWorldHint: true, so the description's statement 'Get the full configuration' is consistent. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context beyond what the annotations convey, such as idempotency or caching behavior.

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, concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. There is no fluff, and it is front-loaded with the key action and resource.

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 simplicity of the tool (retrieve a variation), the rich schema descriptions, and the lack of an output schema, the description is largely complete. It could benefit from noting that the output is the full configuration object, but the current wording is acceptable for a read-only retrieval tool.

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 baseline is 3. The input schema contains detailed descriptions for all four parameters, including prerequisites (e.g., 'Call vwo_list_campaigns first'). The tool description itself does not add any extra parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 the full configuration of one variation on a VWO campaign' uses a specific verb ('Get') and clearly identifies the resource ('full configuration of one variation on a VWO campaign'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like vwo_list_campaign_variations (list) and vwo_new_campaign_variation (create), making its purpose unambiguous.

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 versus alternatives or when not to use it. It implies that it is for retrieving a single variation's full configuration, but lacks explicit context such as prerequisites or exclusions. The input schema hints at calling vwo_list_campaign_variations first for the variationId, but that is not in the description itself.

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