ghl_social_fetch_queue_by_id

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the read-only nature is clear. The description adds behavioral context by noting that the response includes a count of posts with errors, which is 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?

The description is relatively concise, with three sentences covering purpose, response details, and endpoint. It front-loads the purpose but includes endpoint and scopes which, while useful, add length. Overall efficient.

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 retrieval with two parameters and no output schema, the description provides enough context: it explains what is fetched, mentions the error count in the response, and specifies the endpoint. It is adequate for decision-making.

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 50% (only locationId has a description). The tool description does not add any parameter meanings beyond the schema; it does not explain queueId or provide examples for it. It fails to compensate for the missing parameter 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?

The description clearly states 'Fetch a category queue by ID' and 'Retrieves the details of a single category queue by its unique ID,' which is a specific verb-resource pair. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ghl_social_fetch_queues (list) and ghl_social_create_queue (create).

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when-not-to-use, prerequisites, or comparisons with other queue-related tools.

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