strategy_details

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

Discloses that the tool returns a single strategy with detailed fields (i18n names, family metadata, best_run blob, etc.), and returns 404 if not found. Annotations already indicate readOnly and idempotent, but description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 well-structured: front-loads purpose, then parameter explanation, then return fields. Every sentence adds value, no redundancy. Length is appropriate for the complexity.

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 simple input schema and presence of output schema, the description provides complete context: identifies input format, describes outputs in detail, and notes error case. No gaps.

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 has 0% coverage with no parameter description, but description compensates fully by explaining that identifier can be either a URL slug or algorithm_uid, and provides examples. This adds essential meaning beyond the schema's pattern constraint.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get full details for a single Rozkoduj strategy', specifying a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from sibling tools by recommending use after list_strategies.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'after list_strategies once a candidate is chosen, or when the user names a strategy directly.' Also mentions 404 error case, providing clear guidance on when not to use.

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