Get worker

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

No annotations are provided. The description adds some context by listing returned fields, but it does not disclose behavior such as error handling, authentication needs, or what happens if the worker ID is not found. The burden falls on the description, which falls short.

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, front-loaded sentence that clearly states the action and scope. No unnecessary words, making it highly efficient.

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 get operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks mention of error scenarios or behavior. It covers the basic purpose but is not fully comprehensive.

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 100% coverage (one parameter described as 'the worker id'). The description reinforces the parameter purpose with 'by id', but adds no substantial meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 applies.

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 one worker by id' and specifies the fields returned (role, status, autonomy level). This provides a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like workers_list or worker_create.

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 when to use (when you need a single worker by ID), but it does not explicitly mention when not to use or list alternatives among sibling tools. Guidance is minimal.

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