Get OpenProject Work Package

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

No annotations are provided, and the description adds no behavioral details beyond the basic read operation. It does not mention what happens if the id is not found, the return format, or any potential errors, leaving the agent with only the inferred read-only nature of 'get'.

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 sentence, directly front-loaded with the action and resource. It contains no filler or redundant phrasing, making it highly efficient.

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 getter with one parameter and no output schema, the description gives the core retrieval action. However, it lacks any mention of the return structure or how this tool relates to search/list alternatives, making it minimally viable but not comprehensive.

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 describes id as an integer with exclusiveMinimum 0, and the description merely says 'numeric id', which is redundant. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to add meaningful context about the id parameter, such as what constitutes a valid work package id or where to find 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 clearly states the tool fetches a single work package by numeric id. The verb 'Get' plus resource 'single work package' and scope 'by numeric id' unambiguously distinguishes it from siblings like list_work_packages or search_work_packages.

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?

Usage is implied through 'single' and 'by numeric id', suggesting use when you have a specific work package ID. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus search_work_packages or get_my_work_packages, leaving the agent to infer the distinction.

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