get_birth_event

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

Annotations already declare this as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds a meaningful behavioral constraint: only evidence the current user may access is returned, which is useful context beyond the annotations. There is no contradiction with the annotations.

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 with no filler or redundant phrasing, and it front-loads the main action. It is concise, though the brevity leaves room for more explanatory content.

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 getter with read-only annotations, the description is close to adequate. However, it does not clarify what 'evidence' means, whether the optional farm_id is needed for disambiguation, or what the return payload looks like—especially since no output schema is present.

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%, and the description does not compensate by explaining either parameter. event_id is required but not described, and farm_id's optional role is completely unexplained. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema's field names.

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 ('Retrieve') and resource ('a saved birth event and evidence'), which is clear enough to identify the tool's core purpose. It adds an access-scoping qualifier ('the current user may access'), but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like list_birth_events or get_birth_history_evidence.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention list_birth_events for listing or get_birth_source_evidence/get_birth_history_evidence for evidence-specific retrieval, so the agent must infer usage from the tool name and minimal description.

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