get_interview

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

No annotations provided, and description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authorization needs, or potential errors. Simply states 'Get' but with no indication of side effects or restrictions.

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, which is concise, but it sacrifices clarity and completeness. It is under-specified rather than efficiently conveying necessary information.

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 simplicity of the tool (1 param, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It should at least mention what is returned (e.g., interview details) or any prerequisites (e.g., interview must exist).

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 only parameter, interview_id, has no schema description (0% coverage) and the tool description adds no meaning beyond its name. No guidance on format or where to obtain the ID.

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 the action (Get) and resource (single interview) and the identifier (by id). It distinguishes from list_interviews which returns multiple, but could be more specific about the output.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like list_interviews or cancel_interview. Given many sibling tools, explicit directions would be helpful.

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