internal_squad_get_internal_squad_by_uuid

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states nothing about permissions, whether the tool errors on missing UUID, or what the response contains. The 'Tags: Internal Squads Controller' line is autogenerated noise, not 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 short and front-loaded with the path and purpose, which is fine, but the 'Tags: Internal Squads Controller' line is filler that does not earn its place.

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?

A read-by-UUID endpoint with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% param coverage. The description should clarify the return shape or at least that it fetches a single entity; instead it is a name restatement plus controller tag.

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%. The description only repeats '{uuid}' in the path, which the schema already encodes. No semantic meaning (e.g., which squad, format expectations) is added for the single required 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 restates the tool name almost verbatim: 'Get internal squad by uuid'. It is not a tautology in the strict sense since it names a resource, but it adds nothing beyond the name and does not distinguish from siblings like external_squad_get_external_squad_by_uuid or internal_squad_get_internal_squads. The HTTP method line is redundant.

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 when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives such as internal_squad_get_internal_squads (list) or internal_squad_get_internal_squad_usage. Nothing guides the agent on selection.

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