get_record_by_id

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full behavioral burden and discloses almost nothing: it does not say the call is read-only (only implied by "Retrieve"), what happens when the GUID is not found, what permissions are required, or how the `select` projection changes the result.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler; nothing is redundant. It is arguably too terse, but that shortfall is better captured under completeness than conciseness.

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?

This is the only tool for fetching a record by id in the sibling set, and the description omits the non-obvious requirement that a collection name (or its alias) must also be supplied per the anyOf constraint. With no output schema and no annotations, an agent cannot tell what "detailed information" contains or what a miss looks like.

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 `id`, `select`, `collection_name`, and the `collectionName` alias are all documented in the schema itself. The description only echoes the GUID idea and adds no extra semantics, which is the baseline 3 case when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ("Retrieve") and resource ("detailed information for a single record") and names the lookup key (GUID). It does not differentiate itself from siblings like search_records_by_odata or query_by_fetchxml, so an agent must infer that this is the single-record-by-id path.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this instead of search_records_by_odata, query_by_fetchxml, or get_record_access. No prerequisites or conditions (e.g., must already know the GUID and collection) are stated.

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