get_agentFree — look up a single registered agent by id.
Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {
"agentId": "<agentId>"
},
"name": "get_agent"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| agentId | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It adds 'Free' (no cost) but omits permissions, auth needs, rate limits, error behavior, and return format for a lookup tool.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. 'Free' is useful context and the structure is efficient for a simple lookup tool.
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?
Although the operation is simple, with no annotations or output schema the description still leaves return values and error handling unstated. It covers the core operation adequately for a trivial tool but is not fully complete.
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?
One required parameter (agentId) with 0% schema description coverage. The description's 'by id' adds little beyond the parameter name; no format, constraints, or source of the id are given.
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?
States a specific verb ('look up') and resource ('single registered agent') with scope 'by id'. It implicitly distinguishes from list_agents (singular vs list) and register_agent (lookup vs register), though it does not name those alternatives explicitly.
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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The phrase 'by id' implies you need an identifier, but alternatives like list_agents are not mentioned, leaving the agent to infer the routing.
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.