get_api_token

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no additional behavioral context such as authentication requirements, rate limits, response shape, or error 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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action and the target resource clearly, which is appropriate for a simple one-parameter getter tool.

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?

The tool is simple: one required parameter and read-only annotations, so an agent can select and invoke it confidently. However, there is no output schema and the description does not specify what fields or level of detail are returned, leaving the agent somewhat under-informed about the result.

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 token_id as 'API token ID', so the description is not required to add much. The word 'specific' reinforces that this token is identified by an ID, but the description adds no meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and a clear resource ('details about a specific API token'). The word 'specific' distinguishes this from the sibling get_api_tokens, which presumably lists all tokens, making the purpose immediately clear.

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 this is for retrieving one token by ID, but it does not explicitly name get_api_tokens as the alternative for listing tokens, nor does it provide when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance. Usage context is only implied by the word 'specific'.

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