get_circular_details

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool returns details of a circular, which suggests a read-only operation, but it does not disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether it modifies state. The description is clear about what data is returned but lacks broader behavioral context.

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 sentence that front-loads the purpose and quickly enumerates the included content. Every word contributes meaning without redundancy or fluff.

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 tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains what will be returned (coverage, amendments, references, links). It is mostly complete for a detail-retrieval tool, though it could mention if the output is a single object or a list, and whether pagination applies. The lack of nested objects or enums reduces complexity.

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 100% coverage with a clear description of the 'ac_number' parameter (format and examples). The tool description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate since schema coverage is high.

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 'Get full details' and clearly identifies the resource 'specific FAA Advisory Circular'. It lists included content (coverage, additions/amendments, regulatory references, direct links), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'search_circulars' or 'fetch_ac_from_faa'.

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 implies use when full details of a circular are needed after identification, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_circulars' or 'fetch_ac_from_faa', nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites.

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