get_da

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must communicate behavioral traits. The verb 'Get' makes the read-only nature clear, but the description does not disclose error handling, data freshness, or any additional constraints. Since an output schema exists, the return structure is externalized, but the description itself adds little beyond the basic retrieval 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 exceptionally concise, with a one-sentence purpose statement and a brief Args list. Every sentence contributes useful information, and the main description is front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 simple ID lookup with a single parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose. It does not expand on when to use it relative to siblings, but the output schema handles return details, so the description is adequately complete for the tool's simplicity.

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 0%, so the description's Args section carries the burden. It clarifies that 'da_id' refers to 'The DA record ID', adding semantic meaning beyond the schema's property title 'Da Id'. However, it does not explain the expected integer format or any constraints, leaving the explanation minimal.

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 'Get full details of a specific development application by ID.' It clearly identifies the resource (development application) and the action (get full details), and the 'by ID' scope distinguishes it from siblings like search_das or nearby_das that involve searching or proximity.

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 implies the tool is used when you have a specific DA ID and need its full details. It provides clear context but does not explicitly mention alternatives or state when not to use it, so it lacks explicit exclusionary guidance.

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