spreedly_card_refresher_show_inquiry

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

Annotations already declare `readOnlyHint: true`, so the description's 'ONLY reads data' reinforces but adds little new information. No additional behavioral traits (e.g., auth, rate limits) are disclosed. The description does not contradict 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?

The description consists of two concise sentences that convey the purpose and read-only nature without any wasted words. It is appropriately front-loaded and easy to parse.

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?

For a simple retrieval tool with one parameter and read-only annotations, the description is sufficient. It covers the basic purpose and constraint. However, with no output schema, a brief note on return format could improve completeness, but it's not critical.

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 coverage is 100% and the only parameter `inquiry_token` has a description in the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 it 'Retrieves details of a specific card refresher inquiry', using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from the sibling tool `spreedly_card_refresher_list_inquiries` which lists inquiries.

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 includes 'This tool ONLY reads data', which implies it is for read-only retrieval. Although it doesn't explicitly state alternatives, the context of sibling tools makes it clear when to use this vs list tools. No exclusions provided.

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