get_ticket

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it returns all fields and custom fields, and offers optional includes, but it does not state read-only status, error behavior, or authentication requirements. 'Get' implies a read, but the absence of explicit safety context is a minor gap.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the main action and then optional parameters. No redundant words.

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?

For a simple single-ticket retrieval with 2 parameters, the description covers the core behavior and optional fields. However, it does not mention any error handling or distinguish itself from sibling list/search tools, making it slightly incomplete.

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 already provides full descriptions for both parameters (ticket_id and include), with 100% coverage. The description adds little beyond restating the include options, so it does not elevate meaning beyond the schema.

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 'Get a single ticket with all fields and custom fields,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_tickets and search_tickets by emphasizing 'single ticket.'

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 for retrieving a single ticket by ID, but it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like list_tickets or search_tickets, nor does it state when not to use it. The optional include hint provides some context, but no explicit alternatives.

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