passgage_get_user_rate

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavior disclosure. 'Get' clearly indicates a read-only retrieval operation, but the description does not explain return format, not-found behavior, or authentication needs, leaving part of the behavior unstated.

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 with no excessive words or repetition. It is concise while still conveying the exact operation and scope.

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 one-parameter read tool, the description is minimally viable, but it does not define what a user_rate represents, describe the response structure, or cover error/edge cases. With no output schema, a bit more context would make it complete.

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 schema fully covers the single required parameter (id, described as a UUID). The description's 'by ID' adds no new meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score 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 states a specific action ('Get') and resource ('user_rate') scoped by ID, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_user_rates, create_user_rate, update_user_rate, and delete_user_rate. Even without defining the domain concept, the core purpose is 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 phrase 'specific ... by ID' implies use when retrieving a single known user_rate, but the description does not explicitly explain when to use this versus list_user_rates or mention prerequisites such as authentication. The usage context is only implicit, not stated.

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