stiply_get_sign_requestGet one sign request by id: status, timestamps, message, reject reason, owner. Stiply API: GET /v2/sign_requests/{id}.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sign_request_id | Yes | The sign request id (from stiply_list_sign_requests). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations confirm this is a read-only operation. The description adds valuable context by detailing what information will be returned (status, timestamps, message, etc.), which informs the agent about the expected structure and complexity of the data.
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 definition is highly concise. It puts the functional description and the underlying API path side-by-side, which is maximally efficient for an AI agent.
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?
Given that the input parameters are fully documented and the tool is marked read-only, the description provides the necessary detail about the output payload (what fields it contains) to make the definition complete for an agent.
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 schema coverage is 100%, providing a strong baseline. The description adds value by clarifying that the required ID should originate from 'stiply_list_sign_requests', adding contextual flow to the parameter's use case.
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 tool explicitly states it retrieves a 'sign request' using a specific 'id', clearly defining its function. Its placement in a set of request/list sibling tools allows an agent to easily distinguish this specific lookup operation.
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?
While it doesn't explicitly state 'when' to use it, the description clearly defines the mechanism (get by id). Given the sibling list, an agent understands that it should be used only when the ID is available, versus calling list or create tools.
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.