get_api_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions that the tool returns basic information without endpoint details, but it does not describe what 'basic information' includes (e.g., name, description, version), whether it is read-only, authentication requirements, rate limits, or any side effects. This lack of detail leaves an AI with insufficient understanding of the tool's behavior.

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, well-structured sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and clearly conveys the main purpose. No unnecessary words or information.

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?

Given the lack of an output schema and annotations, the description should compensate by explaining the return value. It only states 'basic information' which is vague. For a tool that retrieves data, the description is incomplete without specifying what fields or structure the response contains.

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 single parameter 'api_id' is fully described in the schema with an example. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage (100%).

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get basic information about a specific API without endpoint details'. It specifies the verb 'Get', the resource 'basic information about a specific API', and explicitly excludes endpoint details, which distinguishes it from siblings like 'get_api' or 'get_endpoints' that may include such details.

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 clear guidance on when to use this tool: when you want basic information without endpoint details. This implies it should be used for high-level overviews, while siblings like 'get_api' or 'get_endpoints' are more detailed. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name specific alternatives.

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