get_service_case_resolution

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

The description aligns with the readOnly and idempotent annotations, and adds context about the 'canonical state/evidence projection' nature. However, it does not detail error behavior or side effects beyond what annotations imply.

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 with no unnecessary words.

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 description gives the basic purpose but omits explanation of parameter semantics and return details. The presence of an output schema mitigates the return gap, but parameter ambiguity remains.

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?

Only run_ref is implicitly described via 'scr_ run'; company_ref and project_ref are not explained. The schema has no descriptions, so this is insufficient.

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 clearly states the action (read) and the target (canonical state/evidence projection for an scr_ run). It distinguishes from mutating siblings by using 'read'.

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 alternative read or mutation tools. There is no mention of conditions or alternatives.

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