Get record detail

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that relations and collections are opt-in, but does not mention authentication, rate limits, error scenarios (e.g., record not found), or any side effects. The behavioral insight is minimal.

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, which is concise and front-loaded. However, given the complexity of 6 parameters, it is overly terse. Every word earns its place, but more sentences could improve completeness without sacrificing conciseness.

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?

With 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return value, the meaning of 'evidence', or how to use optional parameters. The description leaves significant gaps for the AI agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only explains include_relations and include_collections (boolean defaults). The required parameters 'id' and 'evidence' are not described at all, and optional parameters 'company' and 'profile' are also unexplained. The description adds very little meaning beyond the schema.

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 fetches one record detail, but it does not explicitly distinguish from siblings like flexi_get_record_summary or flexi_search_records. The verb 'Fetch' and resource 'record detail' are specific, but the description lacks differentiation from similar tools.

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 only mentions that relations and child collections are opt-in, implying optional inclusion, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like flexi_get_record_summary or get_document_detail. There is no mention of prerequisites or when not to use it.

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