merit_get_gl_batch

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the HTTP method is POST, states that entries are included, and explains the addAttachment flag triggers base64 attachment content. However, it does not mention whether the operation is read-only, what happens when the id is not found, or what the response structure looks like.

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 two concise sentences with no filler. The primary purpose is front-loaded, and the parameter clarifications are brief and relevant.

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, this is adequate: it covers the required id, the optional attachment behavior, and the endpoint. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it could better explain what 'entries' means, how the response is shaped, and how this tool relates to the nearby list_gl_batches and list_gl_batches_full tools.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description mostly repeats the schema: id is the batch GUID/GLBId, and addAttachment includes a file as base64. It does not add meaningful semantics beyond what the input schema already 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 clearly identifies the action ('Get') and resource ('one Merit Aktiva GL batch with entries'), and includes the endpoint. It is distinct from listing tools by emphasizing 'one' batch, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like merit_list_gl_batches or merit_list_gl_batches_full.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the alternative list tools or other GL batch tools. It gives operational instructions for id and addAttachment, but no context around selection criteria or exclusions.

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