Get acquisition

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this with 'Read-only.' It adds the useful detail that the id can be FastBound GUID or externalId, which complements the idType parameter. However, it does not disclose not-found behavior or response format beyond what annotations provide.

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 with the core action front-loaded. 'Read-only' is slightly redundant with the annotation but harmless. No wasted words.

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 read tool with full schema and annotations, the description is mostly complete. It lacks details about not-found behavior or return structure, but these are less critical given the tool's simplicity and the presence of output schema absence.

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% with each parameter described, so the baseline is 3. The description's phrase 'FastBound GUID id or your externalId' adds no new meaning beyond the schema's idType enum and property descriptions.

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?

Description states 'Retrieve a single acquisition' with a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like search_acquisitions (search vs. single retrieval) and get_acquisition_item (item vs. acquisition itself).

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?

Usage is implied (use when you have an acquisition id), but no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives or exclusions are provided. Sibling tools like search_acquisitions exist for broader queries, but no guidance is given on choosing between them.

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