featureDetails

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action (retrieves details) without mentioning side effects, permissions, rate limits, or read-only nature. The description is too vague to fully inform the agent.

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 that is front-loaded and efficient. However, it could be more concise by including the parameter detail, but it is not overly long.

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 simple retrieval with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides minimal but adequate context. It does not explain what 'details' includes or handle edge cases, which could lead to incomplete understanding.

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% (one parameter, 'title'). The description does not add any meaning beyond the schema's 'The title of the feature.' Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already documents the parameter.

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 tool retrieves details for a specific feature using a verb+resource pattern. However, it does not distinguish from the sibling tool 'collectionFeatureDetails', which could cause confusion about scope.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'collectionFeatureDetails' or other detail retrieval tools. The context of use is implied but not explicit.

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