get_counter

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool returns 'full details' but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, idempotent, or any potential side effects. The verb 'Get' implies a read, but explicit transparency about behavior is lacking.

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 (17 words) that effectively communicates the tool's purpose without extraneous information. It is appropriately front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Given that there is no output schema and no annotations, the description provides sufficient context for a simple read operation. It lists key elements returned (configuration, code snippet status, goals count), but could offer more detail on response structure. Still, it adequately covers the tool's functionality.

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% for the single parameter 'counter_id', which already has a clear description. The tool description does not add any additional meaning or constraints beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline but does not improve it.

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', the resource 'full details of a single Yandex.Metrica counter', and specific items included ('configuration, code snippet status, and goals count'). It distinguishes from siblings like list_counters by specifying 'single counter' and 'full details'.

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 explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_counters or update_counter. Usage is implied by the purpose, but no direct guidance or conditions are provided, which is a gap given the number of sibling tools.

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