ghl_conversation_ai_get_agent

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations by detailing the returned fields (name, status, actions, settings) and specifying OAuth scope (conversation-ai.readonly), which is useful for authorization understanding.

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 compact with no fluff: a title line, one sentence on retrieval purpose, one on return contents, and then endpoint and scopes. It is front-loaded with the most important action first.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers purpose, return value, endpoint, and authorization. Annotations confirm safe behavior, making it complete for its complexity.

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 a clear description and example for agentId. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, meeting baseline expectations.

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 it retrieves a specific AI agent by ID and returns the complete configuration including name, status, actions, and settings. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_action_by_id and get_generation by focusing on agents.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_agent or list_actions. The description implies usage for retrieving a known agent by ID, but does not provide when-not to use or prerequisites.

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