read_item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. While 'read' implies non-destructive behavior, the description does not explicitly confirm read-only, auth needs, or other side effects. For a simple read operation, this is minimally adequate.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the purpose. It is appropriately sized for a simple read operation, though it could benefit from a brief usage hint without losing 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?

Given the tool's low complexity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. It defines the core action and resource, but lacks detail on return values, what constitutes an 'item', and any prerequisites such as authentication or company 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 description coverage is 50% (only 'company' has a description). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema: it mentions 'by its ID' but does not clarify what the item_id format is or how it relates to QuickBooks. The parameter names and schema are straightforward, but the description fails to add value.

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 'Read a single item in QuickBooks Online by its ID.' uses a specific verb ('read') and resource ('item'), clearly indicating a read operation on a single entity. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'search_items' which list multiple items, and 'create_item' which writes.

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?

The description does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. The context of sibling tools implies that this is for retrieving a known item by ID, but there is no direct guidance.

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