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

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds that the tool retrieves 'resolved facts,' which gives some indication of the return payload but doesn't elaborate on formatting, pagination, or any side effects. It provides minimal additional behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 concise sentence that directly states the action and resource, with no extraneous content.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, so the description is relatively complete for basic use. However, the term 'resolved facts' is undefined, and there is no mention of what the response contains or any edge cases, leaving some ambiguity.

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 case_id is required, but the schema has no description. The description mentions retrieving a case but doesn't directly explain the case_id parameter or its format. Given the low schema coverage, the description does little to compensate, offering only implicit identification.

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 'Retrieve' and identifies the resource as 'a Klarefi case and resolved facts.' This clarifies the tool's function and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_case_package and get_case_workspace, though it doesn't explicitly contrast 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?

There is no information about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_case_package or get_case_workspace. No exclusions or preferred scenarios are provided, leaving the agent without guidance on tool selection.

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