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

The annotations include readOnlyHint=true, and the description's GET method aligns with that. It adds the REST endpoint as context, but does not disclose any additional behavior like error handling, response format, or authentication needs, though the bar is lowered by the annotation.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences with front-loaded purpose. Every word earns its place, and there is no filler or redundant information.

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 read-only getter with one well-described parameter, the description is almost complete. It could explicitly mention that the response returns the agent object, but that is implied by the GET semantics and the simple nature of the tool.

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 parameter 'id' has 100% schema description coverage in the input schema. The description simply restates 'by id' and adds no extra semantic value beyond what the schema already provides, which is acceptable given the high coverage.

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 action: 'Get a single agent by id.' The REST path 'GET /agents/{id}' reinforces the specific resource. It differentiates from the sibling 'list_agents' by emphasizing the singular nature.

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?

Usage guidance is only implied: the word 'single' suggests this is for retrieving one agent rather than listing all. No explicit when-to-use or alternatives are provided, such as when to use list_agents instead.

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