pressable_get_bash_bookmark

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get', which implies a read operation, but does not describe the return format, error behavior when the ID is invalid, authentication requirements, or any side effects. For a retrieval tool, this is a minimal disclosure but lacks meaningful behavioral context beyond the verb.

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 of eight words, front-loading the verb and resource. Every word carries meaning, with no filler or redundancy.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate: it tells what the tool does and what parameter is needed. However, it does not describe the return value (e.g., the structure of the bookmark object) or potential errors, which would be valuable given the absence of an output schema and annotations.

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 only defines 'id' as an integer. The description adds semantic meaning by stating 'by ID', making it clear that the parameter is the unique identifier of the Bash command bookmark to retrieve. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage, though it could further specify where to obtain the ID or its format (e.g., a numeric database ID).

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 ('specific Bash command bookmark'), and clarifies the scope with 'by ID', distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_bash_bookmarks (which retrieves all) and create_bash_bookmark (which creates). This is a clear, unambiguous purpose.

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 phrase 'Get a specific Bash command bookmark by ID' implies the tool is for retrieving a single known item when you have its ID, but it does not explicitly name alternatives, prerequisites, or scenarios where other tools (e.g., list_bash_bookmarks) would be more appropriate. Usage context is implied rather than stated.

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