get_fertilization_regimeGet a structured public fertilization regime using the exact slug returned by search_fertilization_regimes.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | Exact single-segment slug returned by the related Atlarium search tool. | |
| language | No | Optional preferred response language: it, en or es. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | Yes | ||
| tool | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / slug / descriptionPrevious value: -"Single safe public Atlarium slug without path separators."New value: +"Exact single-segment slug returned by the related Atlarium search tool."Output schema / properties / generated_atRemoved value: -{
- "type": "string"
-}Output schema / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "data",
- "generated_at",
- "tool"
-]New value: +[
+ "data",
+ "tool"
+]Input schema / properties / language / descriptionAdded value: +"Optional preferred response language: it, en or es."Input schema / properties / slug / descriptionAdded value: +"Single safe public Atlarium slug without path separators."Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare `readOnlyHint`, `idempotentHint`, and `destructiveHint`, so the description adds value by mentioning the result is 'public' and 'structured', implying no authentication and consistent format. No contradictions.
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?
Single sentence that front-loads the action and resource. No superfluous words. Could be slightly more structured by separating input and output, but it earns its place.
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 present and a simple read operation, the description adequately explains what the tool does and how to use the slug. The sibling list clarifies the workflow. No missing critical information.
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% and the slug parameter already has a clear description. The description adds context about the slug originating from a sibling search tool, but does not fundamentally extend parameter understanding beyond the schema.
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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('structured public fertilization regime'), and clearly links to the sibling tool 'search_fertilization_regimes' via slug. This differentiates it from siblings like `search_fertilization_regimes` and other `get_*` tools.
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?
Explicitly instructs to use the slug from `search_fertilization_regimes`, providing clear context for when to invoke this tool. Does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the instruction is sufficient given the sibling relationship.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.