docuseal_get_submitter

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only states that it gets 'detailed information' but does not specify what that information includes, whether it requires any preconditions, or what happens if the submitter doesn't exist.

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 sentence with no filler, but it is also quite terse. It wastes nothing, though it could have used the space to add valuable context.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. An agent cannot predict what 'detailed information' means or how to interpret the response. The single parameter is documented, but the return payload is completely unspecified.

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 schema fully documents the single parameter (submitter_id) with a clear description, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional semantic context, such as where to find the ID or any formatting constraints.

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 uses the verb 'Get' with a specific resource ('detailed information about a specific submitter'), clearly indicating a single-submitter retrieval. It distinguishes from siblings like list_submitters (which lists all) and update_submitter (which mutates).

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus docuseal_list_submitters or docuseal_get_submission. The description simply states what it does, not the context of choice.

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