prodpad_get_objectiveRetrieve a specific objective by ID with its key results to track OKR progress and align product goals.
Get a specific objective by ID with its key results.
Args:
id (string): Objective UUID
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | The resource ID (numeric or UUID) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the response bundles key results, which is useful beyond the annotations, but says nothing about error behavior for a missing/invalid ID.
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?
Very short and front-loaded: the operation is stated first, followed by a compact args block. The args block largely duplicates the schema, but the overall size is appropriate with no padding.
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-object getter with no output schema, the description conveys what comes back (the objective plus its key results). It is nearly complete; only error/not-found behavior and the overlap with get_objective_keyresults remain unaddressed.
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 the id parameter is already documented as numeric or UUID. The description restates it as an 'Objective UUID', which is actually narrower than the schema and adds no real meaning. 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 (objective by ID), and adds that key results are included. This clearly differentiates it from prodpad_list_objectives, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the similarly-scoped prodpad_get_objective_keyresults sibling.
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 prerequisites are given. It implies the caller must already have an ID, but never says when this is preferable to prodpad_list_objectives or prodpad_get_objective_keyresults, which both overlap in scope.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.