conduyt_get_smart_list

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 does useful work by disclosing the return payload (contact count plus filter definitions), which signals a read-only retrieval, but says nothing about permissions, not-found behavior, or whether the count is live or cached.

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?

One short sentence with the resource and returned fields front-loaded; there is no filler or redundancy.

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 with no output schema, the description is nearly sufficient because it names the returned fields an agent would care about. It falls short only on error/prerequisite behavior and on routing to the related list and contacts 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?

There is a single parameter, and schema coverage is 100% with 'Smart list UUID' already documented in the schema. The description adds no format, sourcing, or example guidance beyond what the schema states, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get a single smart list') and further specifies what the payload contains (contact count and filter definitions). The word 'single' implicitly distinguishes it from conduyt_list_smart_lists, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: 'single' suggests fetching one record by identifier, in contrast to the list sibling. It never states when to prefer this over conduyt_list_smart_lists, how to obtain the id, or points to conduyt_get_smart_list_contacts for membership data.

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