get_import

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the return value (one summary plus CSV mapping) and implies a read-only operation, but it does not describe behavior for missing/invalid import_id, authentication requirements, or any limitations. The basic output is clear, but deeper behavioral context is absent.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the action and result. There is no filler or repetition; every word contributes to understanding the tool's core purpose.

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 one-parameter retrieval tool with an output schema, the description conveys the essential return value. However, it does not clarify the relationship to sibling tools or handle edge cases, so the context is adequate but not fully complete for an agent deciding among many import-related tools.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented import_id parameter. It does not explain the format, source, or semantics of import_id beyond the parameter name itself. Since there is only one parameter and it is relatively self-explanatory, this is a moderate gap rather than a severe one.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Return one import summary with its CSV mapping.' It clearly identifies this as a singular fetch operation, which distinguishes it from list_imports (plural listing) and from related tools like summarize_import or infer_csv_mapping by mentioning the CSV mapping. This leaves little ambiguity about what the tool returns.

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 given about when to use get_import versus its siblings such as list_imports, get_import_rows, or summarize_import. An agent must infer from the name and output schema alone that this is the singular summary retrieval path, which is not explicit.

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