clio_get_matter

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions routing and authentication scope, but fails to describe whether the operation is read-only, what data is returned, or any side effects. This is insufficient for informed invocation.

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 relatively concise at three sentences, but the first two are verbose (repeating the name and routing). Some phrases could be removed without losing information, but the length is not excessive.

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?

The tool has a generic arguments parameter and no detailed parameter descriptions. Even though an output schema exists, the description does not guide the agent on input requirements or output expectations. Among many sibling tools, this lack of completeness hinders correct usage.

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 only parameter 'arguments' is described as a JSON string with no further specification. Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no meaningful structure (e.g., required fields like matter_id). The agent has no indication of what to include in the arguments.

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?

Description only restates the name 'get_matter' without explaining the tool's purpose. It does not specify what a matter is or what the tool retrieves, leaving the agent to infer meaning from the name alone. Lacks a clear verb+resource definition.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like clio_list_matters or clio_get_contact. The description provides no context for selection, making it difficult for an agent to decide appropriately.

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