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

annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the raw REST endpoint path, which is minor context; it says nothing about error behavior for a missing/invalid id or whether the call is scoped to an authenticated account.

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?

Two very short sentences with the core action front-loaded. The endpoint path in the second sentence is borderline filler for an agent but is harmless and terse.

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?

This is a simple one-parameter read, but no output schema exists and the description never characterizes what a work order record returns, so an agent cannot anticipate the response shape. Adequate but with a clear gap.

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 description coverage is 100% with a single documented parameter ('The work order id.'), so the baseline of 3 applies. The description's 'by id' adds no format or range detail beyond the schema's integer/positive constraint.

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 and resource with scope: 'Fetch one work order by id.' This inherently separates it from buildium_list_work_orders, buildium_create_work_order, and buildium_update_work_order. It does not explicitly name a sibling, so it stops short of the top mark.

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, when-not-to-use, or alternative guidance is given. The agent must infer that this is the single-record counterpart to buildium_list_work_orders and that it needs a valid id from a prior list call.

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