get_flag

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the action 'Get' and does not specify return values, error handling, permissions, or side effects. The term 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but no additional behavioral context is added.

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, concise sentence with no redundant words. It directly states the essential purpose, making efficient use of space.

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?

While the tool is simple (one parameter, no nested objects), the absence of an output schema and annotations means the description should explain the return value or at least note that it returns the flag object. It also does not address potential errors or prerequisites. For a read operation, more contextual detail would be expected.

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 has one 'id' parameter with no description (0% coverage). The description clarifies that 'id' refers to the Flag's ID, which adds meaning beyond the schema. However, it does not specify the ID format, required type, or any constraints beyond the schema's integer type.

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 states the action ('Get'), the resource ('Flag'), and the scope ('by ID'), which clearly communicates the tool's purpose. It distinguishes this from sibling getters like get_flag_type and list_flags.

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?

The description implies usage when a specific flag ID is known, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., list_flags for searching) or when not to use this tool. It provides minimal but clear context for straightforward retrieval.

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