agora_get_mission

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that returned participants are '(untrusted)', a meaningful trust signal, but says nothing about permissions, error behavior when the id is invalid, or read-only semantics. Adequate but with clear gaps for a zero-annotation tool.

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?

A single tight sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource and includes the one qualifying detail that matters. Nothing is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and this is a simple single-parameter read. The '(untrusted)' note on participants is a useful completeness touch; the lack of annotations and when-to-use guidance is the only remaining gap.

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%, but there is only one parameter (mission_id) whose name is self-evident. The description adds 'by id', confirming the parameter is an identifier, but no format or sourcing detail beyond the schema 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Fetch one Mission by id') and its scope, clearly distinguishing it from agora_list_missions and agora_get_mission_task. It does not name those siblings explicitly, but the singular 'one Mission by id' makes the distinction inferable.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like agora_list_missions, nor any prerequisites. The 'by id' phrasing implies you need a known mission_id, but the agent must infer the when-to-use conditions.

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