prom_seller_get_message

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing beyond the bare retrieval action. It does not say whether the call fails when the id is unknown, whether it requires seller authentication, or what shape of message data comes back.

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?

A single short sentence with no filler, and the action is front-loaded. It is efficient but so terse that it borders on under-specification for a tool with zero supporting documentation.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage, the description is the only documentation an agent has, and it omits return value expectations, not-found behavior, and permission requirements. For a lookup tool in a 22-sibling seller suite, this is insufficient.

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 0%, and the single id parameter has no description in the schema beyond an anyOf string/integer type. The phrase "by id" weakly implies the id identifies a message, but the description adds no format, source, or validation detail to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb (get), resource (seller message), and distinguishing scope ("one... by id"), which implicitly separates it from the list_messages sibling. However it never names an alternative explicitly and gives no clue how a message is conceptually tied to clients/orders in the surrounding seller toolset.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance: no indication of when to prefer this over prom_seller_list_messages or prom_seller_reply_message, no prerequisites such as knowing the message id source, and no exclusion conditions. The agent must infer that it fetches details for an already-known id.

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