docketbird_get_case

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

Adds context beyond annotations: lightweight, research-scope, works for any case in index (not just user's), does NOT fetch docket. No contradiction with annotations. Could mention rate limits or auth, but still strong.

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?

Well-structured with bullet points for usage scenarios and args. Concise but includes necessary details. Could be slightly shorter, but very readable.

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 output schema exists, description appropriately covers purpose, behavior, and parameter. Mentions return content (metadata and pointer to complaint). Complete for a simple lookup 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?

Despite 0% schema coverage, the description explains the case_id parameter with format and example ('txwd-1:2022-cv-00398'), compensating well for the missing schema 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?

Clearly states the action is to get a case's metadata including a pointer to its complaint. Distinguishes from siblings by contrasting with get_case_details (full docket) and ask_litigation_graph (parties/attorneys).

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 lists when to use (resolving case ID, jumping to complaint, checking PACER ID) and why not to use alternatives. Also notes it does not fetch docket to avoid timeout, providing clear context.

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