get_eventsource

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description only restates the get semantics and adds no additional behavioral context such as return format, pagination, permission requirements, or error behavior. It does not contradict the annotations, but it adds no value beyond them.

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 filler or repetition. It is appropriately concise, though it is also minimal enough that it conveys little beyond the tool's basic purpose.

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?

With one documented parameter and strong annotations, the description is minimally sufficient for a simple getter. However, there is no output schema and the description does not clarify what fields or shape the returned EventSource details will have, leaving some ambiguity about the full response.

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 sole parameter eventsource_id is already documented as 'EventSource ID'. The description adds no further semantic detail about the parameter, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('EventSource'), and the qualifier 'specific' distinguishes it from the list-oriented sibling get_eventsources. It is slightly vague about what 'details' are returned, but the intent is unambiguous.

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 singular 'specific EventSource' implies this is for retrieving one object by ID, but the description never explicitly states when to prefer it over alternatives like get_eventsources or get_device_eventsources, nor does it provide exclusions. Usage context is implied rather than stated.

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