Describe a Marketing Cloud Next / Data 360 endpoint

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 is transparent that this is a read-only descriptor tool that returns a full endpoint contract, and 'before invoking' implies it does not execute the endpoint. It omits potential auth/error details, but they are less critical for a describe operation.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the tool's core purpose and output contents, followed by an explicit usage instruction. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 single-parameter metadata tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is complete: it lists return contents, states when to call it, and the schema fully documents the one parameter. An agent has enough to select and invoke it correctly.

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 100%: endpointId is well documented with examples and discovery instructions. The main description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the 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?

The description names a specific verb ('Get'), a specific resource ('full contract for one endpoint'), and enumerates exactly what is returned: method, base URL family, path, params, body schema, sample body. It clearly differentiates this metadata tool from sibling endpoint-execution tools like mcnext_query or mcnext_create.

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?

It explicitly says to call this tool before invoking an endpoint, which is a clear trigger condition. The endpointId parameter description also tells the agent to use mcnext_list_endpoints to discover ids, giving complementary tool guidance.

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