Get automation

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds the required OAuth scope ('automations:read'), but does not explain return behavior or what 'expand=stats' changes.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and free of padding. The only weak element is 'Reads account data,' which spends a sentence without adding accurate information.

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?

A simple read tool with a fully documented schema, so the description is nearly adequate. However, with no output schema it could say what a returned automation contains, and it provides no sibling routing among the many automation-related tools — both notable omissions.

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%, with all four parameters (including the expand enum and the BEEHIIV_ACCOUNTS fallback logic) documented in the schema itself. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a clear verb+resource ('Get automation'), but adds nothing to distinguish it from siblings like list_automations, list_automation_journeys, or get_automation_journey. The second sentence, 'Reads account data,' is vague and slightly misdirecting — the tool retrieves an automation, not account data.

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 never says when to use this tool versus list_automations or get_automation_journey, nor what preconditions exist beyond auth. The OAuth scope note is an authorization fact, not usage guidance.

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