fetch_evidence_records

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

Discloses important behavioral traits: returns max 50 records but counts all records for summary, includes an error field. Since no annotations are provided, the description adequately covers the tool's behavior beyond the input schema.

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 well-structured with Args/Returns sections, but includes a verbose return type specification that could be trimmed. However, the front-loaded summary sentence quickly conveys the core purpose.

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 no annotations and a single output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: input filtering, max records, return fields (including summary counts and error messages). It is complete for a fetch tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully explains both parameters: 'id' (evidence ID) and 'compliantStatus' (optional, with enumerated values listed). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's property types.

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?

Clearly states it fetches evidence records for a given evidence ID with optional compliance status filtering. The verb 'fetch' is specific, and the resource 'evidence records' is well-defined, distinguishing it from sibling tools that fetch other entities (e.g., applications, controls).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Usage is implied through the description of inputs and outputs, but lacks direction on context or prerequisites (e.g., when to choose this over other fetch tools).

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