Get Finding Detail

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns 'complete untruncated content, all tags, finders, contest info, and links,' which implies a read-only behavior. However, it does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive, has no side effects, or mention any authentication or rate limit requirements. The transparency is good but not exhaustive.

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: a clear purpose sentence, a 'when to use' paragraph, a bulleted list of use cases, and a distinct section for alternatives. Every sentence is informative and earns its place; no filler or repetition.

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 single-parameter retrieval tool with no output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: what it returns, when to use it, and which sibling tools to use instead. The agent can confidently decide when and how to invoke this 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?

Schema coverage is 100% (one parameter fully described in the schema). The description adds value by connecting the parameter to its source ('Found in search_findings results or Solodit URLs'), which aids the agent in constructing the correct input. This goes beyond the schema's own description.

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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('full content and all metadata of a single Solodit finding by its ID or slug'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings by outlining when to use this tool versus search_findings, search_by_tag, and recent_findings.

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?

Explicitly states when to use the tool ('when you already know which finding you want to examine in detail'), provides three bullet points of use cases, and lists three sibling tools to use instead under different conditions. This is exemplary guidance.

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