ingrammicro_get_renewal

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, covering the non-mutating behavior. The description's 'Get full detail' aligns with those hints but does not add extra behavioral context such as error conditions or data freshness.

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 a single clear sentence that front-loads the purpose with no filler. It is minimal without being under-specified.

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?

With an output schema, a single fully documented parameter, and safety hints in annotations, the description is largely sufficient. It could add a note on how to obtain renewal_id or when results might be empty, but these are not critical for such a simple retrieval tool.

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 sole parameter renewal_id is fully described in the schema as 'Ingram Micro's unique renewal id', so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get'), a specific resource ('renewal opportunity'), and scopes it to 'one' item with 'full detail'. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like ingrammicro_search_renewals, which would return a list.

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 need for a single renewal_id implies the agent should already have a specific ID, likely from a search tool, but no explicit when-to-use or alternative guidance is given. There is no mention of using search_renewals first or any exclusion criteria.

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