ie_comp_get_decision

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

No annotations are provided, and the description discloses no behavioral traits such as read-only nature, response format, or error conditions. For a tool with no annotation coverage, the description carries the full burden, and it is insufficient.

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, front-loaded with the action, and includes concrete examples. Every word earns 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?

The tool is simple with one parameter, but lacks an output schema and annotations. The description does not explain what the response contains or behavior when the case number is not found. It is minimally acceptable but leaves gaps.

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 already describes case_number with the same examples. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('specific CCPC decision') and distinguishes from sibling search tools by specifying lookup by case number. It is unambiguous and concise.

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 you know the case number, but it does not explicitly say to use a search tool when the case number is unknown. Sibling 'ie_comp_search_decisions' exists, but no alternative or exclusion is mentioned.

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