prompt_getRetrieve one saved prompt by prompt ID and organization ID to reuse it in FirstReply support workflows.
Get one saved prompt by id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| promptId | Yes | The prompt id (see prompt_list). | |
| organizationId | Yes | The organization id. Use organization_list to find it. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds nothing beyond the basic operation, but with annotations carrying the behavioral burden, a baseline 3 is appropriate.
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?
A single, short sentence that is front-loaded and wastes no words. It's appropriately concise for a simple retrieval tool.
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 the tool's simplicity, full annotation coverage, and 100% schema description coverage, the description covers the essential purpose. However, it lacks any usage context or differentiation from siblings, which would be helpful for an agent navigating many tools.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters (promptId and organizationId) are fully documented in the schema, including cross-references to prompt_list and organization_list. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 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?
States a specific verb (Get) and resource (saved prompt) with the selection key (by id). It's clear what the tool does, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with prompt_list or prompt_delete to help the agent pick the right one among siblings.
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 when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives like prompt_list or prompt_delete. The description merely states the operation without indicating in which scenarios retrieval by id is the right choice.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.