hebbrix_get_procedure

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

The annotations already communicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description does not need to repeat those. It does add the tenant-ownership scoping, but provides no further behavioral context such as errors, permissions, or absence of side effects beyond what the annotations imply.

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 sentence with no filler. The verb, resource, and retrieval method are front-loaded, making the tool's purpose immediately obvious.

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-entity fetch tool with one well-named parameter, a supporting output schema, and safety annotations, the description is nearly complete. It could be stronger by explicitly naming sibling alternatives or noting what happens when no procedure matches, but no critical information needed to call it correctly is missing.

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?

There is a single parameter, procedure_id, with 0% schema description coverage. The description's 'by id' clarifies that the parameter is the lookup key, but it does not describe the ID format, how to obtain it, or any constraints, so the description only partially compensates for the missing schema documentation.

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 ('Get'), a specific resource ('one tenant-owned procedure'), and a clear retrieval method ('by id'). The singular scope and resource type distinguish it from sibling tools like hebbrix_list_procedures, hebbrix_search, and hebbrix_execute_procedure.

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 'by id' phrase implies this tool is for retrieving a single known procedure rather than listing or searching, and 'tenant-owned' scopes the use case. However, there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or which alternative to choose when an ID is unavailable.

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