Retrieve a chute session by UUID to access its widget config and processed animals. Returns session details and entries from farm records.
Get a single chute session by its UUID, including its widget config and the animals processed (entries).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| farm_id | No | The ID of the farm (optional if a default is set). | |
| session_id | Yes | The chute session UUID. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The readOnlyHint=true annotation already marks this as a safe read operation. The description adds behavioral context by specifying the return payload includes the widget config and processed animal entries, which is useful for an agent deciding whether this tool satisfies an information request. No contradiction with 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 entire description is a single, front-loaded sentence that states the action and the key return contents with no filler. Every word earns its place.
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 read-only lookup with two params and no output schema, the description is complete: it identifies the lookup key, the resource type, and what data is returned. The required parameter is self-evident from the schema, and the read-only behavior is covered by 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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, with both parameters (farm_id and session_id) documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond contextualizing session_id as a UUID, but the schema already provides the necessary meaning.
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 ('single chute session by its UUID'), and specifies the returned content ('widget config' and 'animals processed'). It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like list_chute_sessions, which retrieve multiple sessions, by emphasizing 'single' and UUID-based lookup.
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 usage context: when you have a chute session UUID and need that specific session's details. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives such as list_chute_sessions for enumeration or update_chute_session for modifications, nor any when-not-to-use conditions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.