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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full responsibility. 'Retrieve' implies a read-only operation, and 'including signature verification status' adds a useful behavioral detail. However, it does not disclose behavior for missing ids, error cases, or side effects, leaving some uncertainty for a tool without 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, tightly written sentence with no filler. It front-loads the primary action and resource, and every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 a single required parameter and no output schema, the description provides a basic but incomplete picture. It states what is retrieved, including verification status, but does not describe the response structure, error semantics, or how this tool relates to verify_record specifically. This is sufficient for a minimal get-by-id tool but leaves notable gaps.

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%, so the description must add meaning beyond the raw schema. It does indicate that the id parameter identifies the record, but this is largely redundant with the parameter name and the tool name. No additional detail is provided about id format, examples, or accepted values.

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 clearly states a specific verb ('Retrieve'), resource ('a record'), and key ('by id'), which distinguishes it from list_records. The phrase 'including signature verification status' adds useful scope, though it could more explicitly differentiate from verify_record.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use get_record versus sibling tools such as verify_record or list_records. The verification status mention implies overlap with verify_record, but the description does not clarify which tool should be chosen for which scenario.

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