Get detailed information about a specific property verification mission by its ID. Returns mission details including property address, bounty amount, status, checklist items, and viewer/scout information.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | The mission UUID to retrieve. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description adds value by specifying the returned attributes (property address, bounty, status, checklist items, viewer/scout info). It does not disclose error behavior or authorization requirements, but for a read-only get-by-ID, the return content disclosure is sufficient.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, and every word adds value. It lists return fields without redundancy.
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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is complete: it identifies what the tool does, what input it takes, and what information the response will include. No additional context is needed.
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 input schema already fully describes the single 'id' parameter with type and description, achieving 100% schema coverage. The tool description adds no additional parameter details beyond 'by its ID,' so the baseline of 3 applies.
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 uses a specific verb 'Get' with a clear resource: 'specific property verification mission by its ID.' It distinguishes from sibling tools by emphasizing lookup by ID, whereas siblings cover stats, nearby, list, and search.
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 implies usage when you have a mission ID and need its details, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over list_missions or search_missions. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.
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.
Each tool serves a clearly distinct purpose: retrieving a single mission by ID, viewing aggregate stats, finding missions by geographic proximity, listing missions with filters, and searching by keyword. The descriptions clearly differentiate these use cases, so an agent would have no trouble selecting the correct tool.
All tools use snake_case with a verb-noun pattern, but the verbs vary: get_ for retrieval, list_ for paginated browsing, and search_ for keyword lookup. This is a minor inconsistency, but the pattern is still predictable and readable.
Five tools is well within the ideal range for a focused mission discovery server. Each tool adds meaningful functionality without redundancy or bloat.
The server covers the read side of mission discovery thoroughly: single item retrieval, list, search, geo search, and statistics. Write operations like creating, updating, or accepting missions are missing, but the descriptions suggest this is intentionally a read-only browsing tool for scouts.
