get_ext_check_collection

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the endpoint path and single-id scope, but does not add auth requirements, rate limits, or return 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 short and front-loaded with the operation and endpoint. It has minor redundancy between 'Get check collection' and 'Get a single check collection by id', but nothing materially wasteful.

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 simple read-by-id tool with full schema description coverage and rich annotations, the description is largely complete. It omits return-value details, but this is minor given the straightforward GET-by-id operation.

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 checkCollectionId, excludeCheckStatuses, and x-trace-id are already documented in the schema. The description only references checkCollectionId indirectly through the path and does not add meaning 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get check collection') and clarifies scope with 'single ... by id', plus the HTTP path. It does not explicitly name list_ext_check_collections as the alternative, but 'single ... by id' sufficiently distinguishes the operation.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus list_ext_check_collections, get_ext_check_collection_template, or get_ext_check. The agent must infer usage from the name and path alone.

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