Get a single relation

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by specifying the response scope (includes contacts, tags, custom fields) and the HTTP endpoint, which the annotations do not convey.

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 concise and efficient, with the first sentence restating the title but the second adding specific behavior. The HTTP endpoint line is a useful reference, though slightly redundant. Overall, it is well-structured and easy to scan.

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 get-by-ID tool with rich annotations (read-only, idempotent), the description covers the response contents and endpoint. Without an output schema, it could be more explicit about return format, but the included fields offer sufficient operational 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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for both 'id' and 'administration'. The description itself does not need to add parameter details, as the schema fully documents them, meeting the baseline requirement.

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 'Get a single relation by ID', identifying the specific verb, resource, and identifier. It mentions the included data (contacts, tags, custom fields), which distinguishes it from list operations and other resource-specific getters like get_contact.

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 implies usage when you have a relation ID and want that single record, providing no explicit when-not-to-use or comparison with sibling tools. Some context is derivable but no exclusions or alternatives are stated.

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