azure_get_work_item

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Obtém detalhes' without specifying whether it returns all fields by default, the effects of the optional 'fields' parameter, potential errors, or authentication requirements. This is a generic statement that adds no behavioral context beyond the tool's name.

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 concise sentence that states the tool's purpose without any filler or unnecessary details. It is well-structured and front-loaded, earning its place in the minimal space it occupies.

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 get-by-ID tool with two parameters and no output schema, this description is minimally adequate. It clearly indicates the core function but lacks details on return format or default field behavior. The schema covers the parameter semantics, and the sibling context helps clarify its role, but the description alone would leave a user wanting more context about expected outputs.

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 provides descriptions for both parameters ('id' and 'fields') with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already specifies. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting for parameter understanding.

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 'Obtém detalhes de um work item específico' clearly states the tool's verb (obtém) and resource (work item específico). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like azure_create_work_item, azure_update_work_item, and azure_delete_work_item, and from azure_query_work_items which searches multiple items. The singular 'specific' implies fetching by ID, reinforced by the required 'id' parameter.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not mention that this tool is for fetching a single work item by ID, while azure_query_work_items should be used for searching or listing. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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