getAgent

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe read behavior is established. The description adds one useful behavioral detail: the response includes a version_history_enabled boolean. However, it does not disclose other behavioral aspects such as error handling, pagination, or organization scoping beyond that single field.

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 two sentences with the primary action front-loaded. The markdown link and 'Tags: Agents' suffix add slight clutter, but the core message is concise and every sentence serves a purpose.

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 single-parameter read operation, the description covers the essential purpose and highlights a notable response field. There is no output schema, but the description doesn't need to enumerate all return fields, and the readOnlyHint annotation covers safety context.

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 input schema fully describes agent_id with 100% coverage, and the description's 'by ID' reinforces the parameter's purpose. No additional parameter semantics are needed because the schema handles the documentation burden.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('details of a specific agent by ID'), which clearly identifies what the tool does. It also distinguishes itself from sibling list operations by emphasizing the singular 'specific agent by ID', and the mention of version_history_enabled adds a distinguishing detail about the response.

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 an agent ID and need details, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like listAgents or state when not to use it. The 'by ID' condition gives context but no direct exclusion or routing guidance, so the usage guidance is only implied.

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