get_record

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description does not need to restate read-only behavior. It does add useful context that the result contains workflow fields, but it does not disclose auth needs, error behavior, or what happens for a missing or invalid record_id.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the verb, resource, supported types, and purpose without losing conciseness.

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 two-parameter read tool with readOnly and openWorld annotations, the description is mostly complete: it names the entity types, the singular fetch semantics, and the nature of the returned fields. It does not enumerate workflow fields or error cases, but no output schema exists and the description is sufficient for selecting and invoking the tool.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It restates the record_type enum and says 'one' record, but it never explains record_id semantics, the relationship between record_type and record_id, or the expected format. The schema's property names and enum values are doing nearly all the work.

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 precise fetch operation: get one Jobber entity across seven enumerated types, and it explains that the result includes workflow fields for preparing a safe change. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling list/search tools like search_records and find_client.

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 usage context – fetching a single record before making a change – but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over find_client, search_records, or get_audit_log, nor does it name any exclusions. The context is clear, but alternatives are not discussed.

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