get_automation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states what the tool returns, but fails to disclose whether the operation is read-only, any authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. The behavioral aspect is minimally addressed.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the main purpose and includes the key aspects of the return value (trigger, steps, status). No unnecessary words; every part contributes meaning.

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 output schema, the description does mention the return content (trigger, steps, status), which is helpful. However, it lacks details on error handling, authorization, or rate limits. For a simple retrieval tool, it is adequate but not comprehensive.

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%, so the input schema already describes both parameters (apiKey, automationId). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, placing it at the baseline of 3.

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 clearly states the verb 'Get', resource 'single automation by ID', and the scope 'including its trigger, steps, and current status'. It distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like list_automations or get_automation_stats.

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 usage when you have a specific automation ID and need full details, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_automations or get_automation_stats. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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