get_consumer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It implies a read operation by using 'Get', but it does not explicitly state that it is read-only, describe what 'usage' refers to, or indicate any output shape. This leaves meaningful uncertainty for a tool with no output schema.

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 sentence with no filler or redundancy, and it front-loads the primary action and object. It loses a point because the ambiguous term 'usage' could be clarified without much added length.

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 read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is too thin. It does not explain what fields or usage data will be returned, whether the operation is safe/idempotent, or how it fits among the many consumer-related siblings. An agent would likely need to call it to discover its behavior.

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?

The single parameter consumer_id is already fully described in the input schema as a UUID. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter, so the baseline of 3 applies because schema coverage is 100%.

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 identifies a clear verb and resource: retrieve details and usage for a single consumer. It is easily distinguished from sibling list_consumers, which addresses multiple consumers, and from create/rotate/revoke operations. The term 'usage' is somewhat vague but does not obscure the core purpose.

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 is given for when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention that this is the right choice for retrieving a single consumer by ID, nor is there any contrast with list_consumers or the key-management siblings. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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