get_integration_by_key

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

No annotations provided; description only states it's a GET request (implying read-only) but lacks details on side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or error handling. The return format is not described.

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?

Description is brief (two sentences plus a list) and front-loaded with the core purpose. The list of keys is redundant with the schema but acceptable.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description fails to explain what 'global integration info' entails or indicate response format, error conditions, or usage hints.

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%, and the parameter's description already lists all valid values. The description repeats this list and adds the endpoint, but adds no new meaning beyond the schema.

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 explicitly states 'Get global integration info by key name', clearly defining the action and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like list_integrations by specifying a single key lookup.

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 lists valid key names but provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., list_integrations, get_integration_config). No when-not-to-use or context for selection.

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