transfers.get

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Fails to disclose read-only nature, error behavior when ID is invalid/not found, or return value structure. 'Get' implies retrieval but lacks safety guarantees or side-effect warnings.

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?

Extremely efficient at 6 words. Front-loaded with verb 'Get', zero filler. Despite brevity, every word serves the definition.

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?

Adequate for a simple retrieval tool but gaps remain: no output schema means return fields are undisclosed; no error handling described; 0% schema coverage leaves parameter undocumented beyond type. Minimum viable but not thorough.

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 0% (parameter 'id' has no description). Description partially compensates by stating the ID is the lookup key ('by id'), explaining the parameter's purpose. However, lacks format constraints, example values, or source guidance (where to obtain valid IDs).

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?

Clear verb 'Get' and resource 'Ryft transfer', with 'by id' indicating lookup method. Distinguishes from siblings 'transfers.create' (mutation) and 'transfers.list' (collection) through the singular 'id' qualifier, though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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 guidance on when to use versus 'transfers.list' (for when you lack an ID) or error conditions. No prerequisites mentioned despite being a lookup tool requiring a valid identifier.

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