get_segment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses experimental status, required IDs, and that the result includes filtering rules, but it does not state read-only/side-effect behavior, permissions, pagination, or fuller return characteristics.

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 three compact sentences, with the experimental flag and purpose front-loaded, followed by prerequisites and ID discovery guidance. Every sentence supports correct invocation, with no filler.

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 two-parameter get tool, it covers the purpose and the ID discovery prerequisites. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it should say more about the return payload and whether the operation is strictly read-only.

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%, so both parameters are already fully documented in the schema. The description only repeats that both are required and points to the list tools for finding IDs; it adds no format or semantic detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 uses a specific verb, 'Get detailed information,' and a specific resource, 'a specific segment,' including its filtering rules. It distinguishes this from the list_* discovery tools by saying to use those first, though it does not explicitly contrast with get_parent_segment or segment_sql.

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?

It states the prerequisite that both parent_segment_id and segment_id are required and tells the agent to use list_parent_segments and list_segments first to find IDs. This gives clear context for when to call it, but it does not state when not to use it or name an alternative for detailed segment data.

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