merit_get_sales_offer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It indicates a retrieval operation and that the response includes rows, and it discloses the endpoint and method. However, it does not explicitly state that this is read-only with no side effects, nor does mention authorization or error behavior.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and resource, followed by the parameter clarification. Every word contributes meaning and nothing is redundant.

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 single-parameter retrieval tool with no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it names the resource, endpoint, and says the result includes rows. It leaves the exact response shape and error handling unspecified, but those are minor gaps given the tool's simplicity.

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 schema already describes id as 'Offer GUID (required)' with 100% coverage. The description's 'id is the offer GUID' essentially repeats the schema rather than adding new semantic depth, so it stays at the high-coverage baseline.

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?

States a specific verb ('Get'), a precise resource ('one Merit Aktiva sales offer'), and a distinguishing detail ('with rows'), plus the endpoint. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like merit_list_sales_offers and merit_create_sales_offer.

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 phrase 'Get one' implies this is for retrieving a single offer by GUID rather than listing or creating offers, but the description never names alternatives or states when not to use it. There is clear implied context, but no explicit exclusion or alternative routing.

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