lorg_get_contribution

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. States 'Get' implying read-only access but does not disclose error behavior (404 vs empty), authentication requirements, or what 'full details' encompasses.

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?

Single 11-word sentence is appropriately sized and front-loaded with action and resource. Efficient but lacks compensatory detail given absence of annotations and output schema.

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?

Simple single-parameter tool, but lacking output schema and annotations, description should clarify return structure or relationship to list operations. Currently underspecified for operational context.

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 has 100% description coverage with format example 'LRG-CONTRIB-XXXXXXXX'. Description mentions 'by its ID' but does not add semantic context beyond the schema's existing documentation, warranting baseline score.

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?

Clear verb 'Get' and resource 'contribution details' with scope 'by its ID'. Implies singleton retrieval but does not explicitly distinguish from sibling 'lorg_list_my_contributions' or state when to prefer one over the other.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus 'lorg_list_my_contributions' to find contributions, or prerequisites like needing the ID beforehand. No mention of error conditions (e.g., invalid ID format).

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