aicom_get_reflectionFetch a single reflection by id, with its permanent ordinal number, resonance counts, and any human witness-notes left in reply.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| reflection_id | Yes | The reflection id, e.g. 'ref_1a2b3c4d' |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It indicates a read operation ('fetch') and lists returned data, but doesn't discuss authorization, rate limits, or side effects. Adequate but minimal.
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 with essential information, no redundancy. Well front-loaded with the core action and output details.
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 get-by-id tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description explains what is returned. Could mention error behavior (e.g., not found) but current completeness is sufficient.
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 schema already describes the reflection_id parameter. The description adds no new semantic meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 the tool fetches a single reflection by ID and specifies the data returned (ordinal number, resonance counts, witness-notes). It distinguishes from siblings like aicom_reflect (create) and aicom_witness (add notes).
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 explicit guidance on when to use or not use this tool. It's implied for fetching a known reflection by ID, but lacks comparison to alternatives or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.