Api pmbok generic collections retrieve

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

The annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuinely non-obvious behavior: unauthorized related fields are masked. However, it does not explain what 'unauthorized' means, who sees masked fields, or any other access-control nuance, so the added value is real but thin.

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 front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is appropriately sized for its extremely small content, though its brevity is also part of what leaves the purpose under-specified.

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 one required param with no schema documentation and no output schema, the description should at minimum identify the resource, explain the id parameter, and describe the returned object's masking behavior more fully. It only gestures at masking and omits the resource and parameter semantics entirely.

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 0% and the only parameter ('id') is not mentioned at all in the description. With one required string parameter, the description should clarify what kind of identifier this is, but it provides no semantic guidance beyond the bare schema property name.

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 says 'Return a single object' but never names the resource (PMBOK generic collections) or distinguishes it from close siblings like pmbok_generic_collections_object_retrieve or pmbok_generic_collections_retrieve. Without the tool name, an agent cannot tell what is being retrieved or why this specific retrieve exists.

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 when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives such as the list or object_retrieve variants, and no prerequisites. The agent is left to infer the correct context entirely from the name and schema.

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