passgage_get_access_zone

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. However, it only states 'Get a specific access_zone by ID' and provides no details on error behavior (e.g., 404 if not found), return format, pagination, or authentication requirements. For a read operation this is minimal but still lacks transparency expected from a well-described tool.

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 short sentence that is exact and front-loaded. It contains no filler or redundant information, making it highly 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?

The tool is simple with only one parameter and no output schema. The description covers the primary action but fails to mention what is returned (e.g., the full access_zone object), behavior when the ID does not exist, or any required prerequisites. Given the simplicity, this is a borderline adequate description but lacks completeness for an agent that needs to understand the full context.

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: the 'id' parameter is described as 'The UUID of the access_zone to retrieve.' The description adds no further meaning, but since the schema already provides full parameter documentation, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific access_zone by ID' clearly identifies the action (get), the resource (access_zone), and the specificity (by ID). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_access_zones, create_access_zone, update_access_zone, and delete_access_zone, which serve different purposes.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus list_access_zones or other retrieval alternatives. No explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusions are given. The presence of list_access_zones among siblings makes this omission noticeable, as a one-sentence mention would have clarified the distinction.

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