get_event_question

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. The verb 'Retrieve' indicates a read operation, but the description does not disclose error behavior, permissions, or potential side effects. It is minimally transparent but not misleading.

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 concise sentence with no filler. The key action and object are front-loaded, making it easy to scan while every word carries 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?

For a simple two-parameter get operation with an output schema, the description is largely sufficient. The only slight gap is that it does not explicitly state that event_id and question_id together identify the question, but the schema and name largely compensate.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds a slight clarification by labeling the question as a 'registration question,' but it does not explain the semantics of event_id and question_id (e.g., that question_id is scoped to an event), leaving ambiguity about how the two IDs relate.

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 uses the specific verb 'Retrieve' and a clear resource, 'details of a registration question.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_event_questions (plural list vs singular get) and create/delete_event_question, so an agent can tell it apart without opening the schema.

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 does not state when to use this tool versus list_event_questions or other alternatives. The intended usage (fetching a single question by its IDs) is implied by the name and parameters but never made explicit, leaving it at the 'implied usage' level.

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