get_feeding

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read nature is covered. The description adds useful return-content context (snapshot and deliveries) but does not disclose additional behavioral details such as not-found handling, authentication needs, or response format. It does not contradict the readOnlyHint.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then adds the important return details. There is no filler or repeated information already present in the schema.

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?

With no output schema, the description wisely explains what the response will contain (ingredient snapshot and per-group deliveries). It is adequate for a simple read-only getter; the only minor gap is the lack of error or not-found behavior, which is not critical for tool invocation.

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%, so the schema already documents both feeding_id and farm_id. The description reinforces that lookup is by UUID but adds no extra semantic detail beyond the schema, such as how the optional farm_id default behaves.

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 ('Get a single feeding by its UUID') and specifies the exact scope, distinguishing it from list_feedings. It also names the contained data (ingredient snapshot with targets/actuals and per-group deliveries), which removes ambiguity about what this tool returns.

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 phrase 'Get a single feeding by its UUID' implies use when a caller needs one specific feeding record, not a list or a chute session. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer another tool or exclude alternatives, so the guidance is clear but not fully explicit.

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