get_title

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations already provide (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive). It does not describe return values, error handling, or any other runtime behavior, though annotations cover the safety profile.

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—three words—with no wasted text. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for a simple getter, though it sacrifices clarity for brevity.

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 the tool is simple with one parameter and full schema coverage, the description might be too minimal. It fails to clarify what a 'title' is (e.g., salutation, document title) and provides no context about the return value or typical use case, leaving ambiguity among many similar get_* tools.

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 input schema fully documents the single parameter title_id with a description, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, earning the baseline score of 3.

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 'Fetch a title' uses a specific verb ('fetch') and resource ('title'), clearly indicating this is a retrieval operation. However, it does not differentiate from the many sibling get_* tools (e.g., get_task, get_unit) and leaves 'title' ambiguous without context.

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 versus alternatives. The description does not mention that it retrieves a single title by ID, nor does it reference any sibling tools or exclusions.

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