get_problem

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or idempotent, though the action 'retrieves' implies no side effects. The description is adequate but lacks explicit behavioral disclosure.

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 a single sentence that is reasonably concise, but it could be structured more effectively (e.g., listing key components) and still fits within acceptable length.

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?

With only one parameter and no output schema, the description should compensate by detailing the parameter and expected return value. It mentions 'related information' vaguely and does not specify what exactly is returned, leaving the agent uncertain.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the `titleSlug` parameter—what it represents, expected format, or how to obtain it. This is a significant gap given the single parameter.

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 it retrieves details about a specific LeetCode problem including description, examples, constraints, and related information. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool `fetch_problem_plain_text`, which also retrieves a problem.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs siblings like `fetch_problem_plain_text` or `search_problems`. It does not specify prerequisites or context for usage.

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