get_password

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does clarify the key behavioral trait that the response includes the actual password value, which is important context. However, it doesn't disclose whether there are permission requirements for seeing the password value, or what the response format looks like beyond the password.

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 sentence, zero wasted words. It fronts the core purpose and adds the key behavioral note about including the password value. Nothing extraneous.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description carries responsibility for explaining return behavior—it mentions the password value inclusion, which is the critical piece. However, for a tool retrieving a sensitive secret, it's missing guidance on the show_password toggle semantics and any authorization caveats. Adequate but not thorough.

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 both parameters (id and show_password) are documented in the schema. The description adds no further semantic detail beyond what the schema provides. Per the rubric, with high schema coverage, baseline 3 is correct since the description doesn't need to compensate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') plus resource ('password entry') and adds scope ('by ID') and source ('IT Glue'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like search_passwords (which searches rather than retrieves a specific item). The parenthetical noting it 'includes the actual password value' reinforces what makes this tool distinct.

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 implies this tool is for retrieving a specific password by ID, which distinguishes it from search_passwords. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives like search_passwords, nor mention any caveats about sensitivity or permissions for accessing password values. Usage context is only implied, not stated.

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