retrieve_a_score

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description reinforces this with 'Fetches data. Makes no changes' and includes the HTTP method GET. However, no additional behavioral details beyond what annotations already provide are included, so the description adds minimal value.

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 extremely concise, consisting of three lines including an emoji, the HTTP method, and two short sentences. Every part serves a purpose: indicating read-only state, the resource type, and the action. No unnecessary information is present.

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 simple read-only tool with one parameter and comprehensive annotations, the description provides adequate context. However, it does not explain what a 'score' represents in ActiveCampaign or mention potential error scenarios. Since there is no output schema, some return format expectations might be useful.

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?

There is one parameter 'id' with full schema coverage (100%). The schema already describes it as 'ID of the score to retrieve'. The description does not add any additional parameter-specific information, so it meets the baseline for high coverage.

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 the action ('Retrieve a score') and identifies the resource. It includes additional context like 'READ-ONLY' and the endpoint path. However, it does not distinguish this tool from siblings like 'retrieve_a_contacts_score_value' or 'list_all_scores', which may cause confusion about which tool to use for specific score retrieval needs.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are siblings like 'retrieve_a_contacts_score_value' and 'list_all_scores' that might be more appropriate in some contexts. The description lacks any when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative recommendations.

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