get_control

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behaviors: returns enriched data (verified-status, orphaned flag), direct single object, and 404 on missing. It doesn't cover auth or rate limits, but for a read operation this is 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value: first states what it does and its enriched output, second clarifies response format and error case.

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 simple retrieval tool with an output schema, the description covers key aspects: what is returned (enriched control, orphaned flag), response format (single object), and error condition (404). No further context needed.

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 coverage is 75% (3 of 4 params described). The description adds no per-parameter details beyond what the schema already provides. It mentions the enrichment but does not clarify parameter constraints or formats. Baseline score is appropriate.

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 clearly states 'Get a single control with verified-status enrichment and an orphaned flag', specifying the exact resource and scope. It distinguishes from siblings like get_controls (plural) by emphasizing 'single control' and explicitly stating it returns one object not wrapped in an array.

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 versus alternatives like get_controls or other retrieval tools. Usage is implied for fetching a specific control by ID, but no when-not or alternative guidance is provided.

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