get_api_operation

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world hints. The description adds useful behavioral context by saying there is 'No network request' and by noting that referenced definitions are included in the returned schema.

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 front-loaded sentences with no wasted words. The core purpose and the no-network behavioral note are both stated efficiently.

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 one-parameter read-only lookup with no output schema, the description adequately explains what is returned (parameters and request schemas including referenced definitions) and that no network request occurs. The main remaining gap is how operationId should be obtained or formatted.

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 for the undocumented operationId parameter. It only implies that operationId refers to an Apple operation, without explaining format, source, or how to discover valid values via search_api_operations.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('exact parameters and request schemas ... for an Apple operation'), and adds the timing context 'before executing it.' It does not explicitly name sibling tools like search_api_operations or read_api, but the pre-execution schema-lookup purpose is clear.

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 'before executing it' gives clear usage context and implicitly positions this tool as a prerequisite to execution. It does not state exclusions or name alternatives such as search_api_operations for discovering operation IDs.

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