get_integration

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. Description adds useful context about returned fields (masked key, workspace access, etc.) and enterprise restriction. No contradiction with annotations; additional transparency provided.

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?

Four sentences, each earning its place: purpose+details, usage context, enterprise restriction, error note. Front-loaded and concise with zero waste.

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?

Covers purpose, usage, enterprise gating, and error codes. Has output schema, so return values not needed. Complete for a simple retrieval tool; could mention authentication but annotations cover readOnly. Sufficiently complete.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'slug' with a complete description. The tool description only repeats 'by slug' without adding format or source details. Baseline 3 appropriate as description adds no extra value beyond 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?

Clearly states verb 'Fetch' and specific resource 'one integration by slug', listing included data (masked key, workspace access, allowed models, configuration metadata). Differentiates from siblings like list_integrations, create_integration, etc.

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 advises use 'before editing provider-specific settings or auditing access', providing clear context. Also warns about Enterprise gating and 403 error, implying when not to use. No alternative tool named, but guidance is strong.

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