agora_get_claim

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does add a valuable security-relevant disclosure ('untrusted remote content'), but omits read-only confirmation, auth requirements, and error/not-found behavior for a fetch operation.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words; the purpose and the caveat are both compactly conveyed.

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 low-complexity one-parameter read tool with an output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, the identifier requirement, and an important content-trust caveat. Missing behavioral details (read-only nature, error handling) are minor but not fully compensated absent annotations.

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%, so the single claim_id parameter is undocumented in the schema. The phrase 'by id' minimally signals that claim_id is an identifier, but no format, source, or example is provided.

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 ('Fetch') and resource ('one Claim by id'), clearly distinguishing a single-claim retrieval from siblings like agora_list_claims. It does not explicitly name or route against those siblings, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Implies you need an id but offers no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative guidance (e.g., list_claims for browsing). No context on prerequisites or error cases.

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