get_communityRetrieve details and data for a Circle community, optionally using a named private account's credentials, to inspect community information.
Get community details. Reads community data.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| account | No | Named private Circle account; selects credentials, not a remote community ID. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so safety is fully covered. The description's only behavioral claim ("Reads community data") merely restates readOnlyHint and adds no new context such as auth requirements or what the read returns.
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 short and front-loaded, but the second sentence ("Reads community data") is pure redundancy for an operation already flagged readOnlyHint. It does not earn its place.
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 parameterless-input read tool with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the definition is minimally viable but leaves "community details" undefined and gives no hint about what is returned or whether it requires an account context.
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% and the single parameter has a strong description clarifying that "account" selects credentials rather than a remote community ID. The tool description itself contributes nothing to parameter meaning, so the 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 specific verb and resource ("Get community details"), so the agent knows it is a read of community data. However, it offers no differentiation from siblings such as update_community, list_accounts, or the many other community-scoped getters, and the second sentence adds nothing.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of the account parameter's role in selection. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.