getStage

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states the action and target, but does not mention return format, error behavior on missing ID, whether it can return null/404, or any authentication requirements. For a read operation, this is minimal disclosure.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. It states the action and target clearly without any redundant or off-topic content.

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 this is a simple single-parameter getter, the description is adequate for basic understanding. However, the lack of annotations and output schema means the description should ideally provide more context about return values or error handling. It is functional but not enriched.

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?

The schema already provides complete coverage for the single parameter 'id' with its own description ('Stage ID'). The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already states, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 'Get a stage by ID' uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('stage') with a clear scoping mechanism ('by ID'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like listStages, createStage, and updateStage by indicating this is a single-record retrieval operation.

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 the tool should be used when you have a specific stage ID and need that stage's details, but it does not explicitly mention alternative tools like listStages for browsing or updateStage for modifying. The usage context is implied rather than explicitly contrasted with siblings.

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