get_calls_app

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Get details' clearly conveys a read-only, single-resource operation, which is the core behavioral trait, but nothing is said about error behavior, permissions, or response contents. It is minimally transparent but not misleading.

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 filler words. It is appropriately sized for a simple getter, though 'details' is vague and the sentence largely restates the tool name.

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 two-parameter GET tool with full schema coverage, the description is nearly adequate: an agent can determine the operation and required inputs. However, there is no output schema and no explanation of what 'details' will be returned, nor a pointer to list_calls_apps for discovering app_id, leaving minor but real gaps.

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 100%, with both account_id and app_id documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, 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 clear verb ('Get') and resource ('specific Calls application'), and the word 'specific' signals singular retrieval rather than listing. It does not explicitly name the sibling list_calls_apps or spell out what 'details' includes, so it is clear but not maximally differentiated.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_calls_apps or get_calls_turn_key. The word 'specific' implies the caller already has an app_id, but the description never states this or provides any exclusion criteria.

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