Get Coach Suggestion

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses failure behavior for unknown or non-owned ids and explains that a modified accept includes appliedPayload. This adds useful expectations about errors and return-shape nuances.

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?

Three concise sentences, each carrying one distinct fact: what is returned, where the id comes from, and when an error occurs. There is no redundant wording or filler.

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 single-parameter, read-only tool, the description covers return contents, input provenance, and error cases. With readOnlyHint already covering side effects and the schema covering the id format, nothing essential is missing.

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 only defines id as a UUID with 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It does so by specifying that the id must come from get_suggestions and must belong to the caller, which is the key semantic constraint for successful invocation.

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?

States a specific verb ('Return ... in full') and a specific resource ('one of the coach's own proposals'), and clarifies scope by mentioning payload and appliedPayload. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling get_suggestions, which retrieves a list rather than a single item.

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?

Explicitly instructs the agent to pass an id from get_suggestions, establishing the prerequisite relationship with the list tool. It does not formally list exclusions or alternatives, but the retrieval-by-id context is clear enough for correct selection.

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