get_external_squad_by_uuid

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description's '[READ]' tag and endpoint path restate that safety profile and add the HTTP verb/path, but nothing about error behavior (e.g. unknown UUID) or return characteristics.

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 short lines, zero filler, resource stated first. It is arguably under-sized for a tool definition, but no sentence is wasted.

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 single-parameter read with full schema coverage and no output schema, the definition is minimally sufficient. It does not address failure modes or indicate what the returned squad object contains, leaving a modest 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% and the single uuid parameter is fully documented in the schema with format and pattern. The description adds no syntax or semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Get external squad by uuid') plus the REST mapping, so the agent knows this retrieves a single squad. It is distinguishable from the list sibling get_external_squads only by the 'by_uuid' phrasing rather than an explicit contrast, so it falls just short of a 5.

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 is only implied: the name and UUID parameter make clear it is for fetching one squad by identifier. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over get_external_squads or what happens if the UUID is unknown.

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