kyt_get_case

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. 'Fetch' signals a read operation and the phrase 'including evidence notes and screening linkage' discloses response content, but it does not explicitly state that the operation is side-effect-free or describe not-found/error behavior.

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 with no filler. The core action and resource appear first, and the additional content detail is appended without redundancy.

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 one-parameter read operation with no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it names the input key, the resource, and key return content. It loses one point because it does not provide any explicit guidance on what happens when the case ID does not exist or how to handle the screening-linkage field.

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%, and the single parameter case_id is already documented as 'Case UUID.' The description adds no new semantic detail about the parameter beyond the schema.

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 ('Fetch'), names the resource ('a single case'), scopes it by 'ID', and even previews contents ('evidence notes and screening linkage'). This clearly differentiates it from siblings like kyt_list_cases and kyt_create_case.

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 use case is implied: use this when you have a case UUID and need the full case record. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives, such as using kyt_list_cases to find IDs first or kyt_recent_screenings for screening-focused results.

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