get_record

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only behavior is known. The description adds value by disclosing that the response includes affected animals/groups, giving the agent useful information about the returned data beyond a bare 'get' operation.

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 sentence with no filler. The primary action and target are front-loaded, and the additional detail about affected animals/groups is concise and useful.

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 retrieval tool, the description plus schema and annotations cover what an agent needs to invoke it correctly. The lack of an output schema is partly mitigated by the mention of affected animals/groups, though the exact response shape is not detailed.

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 both parameters (farm_id and record_id) are fully documented in the schema. The description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond mentioning UUID, which aligns with record_id, but it does not enrich farm_id semantics.

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 a specific verb ('Get'), a specific resource ('a single record'), and the identifying key ('by its UUID'). It also signals additional context ('including affected animals/groups'), which helps distinguish it from list-oriented siblings like list_records.

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 this is for fetching a single record by UUID rather than listing records, but it does not explicitly contrast with list_records or mention when not to use it. No alternative tools or exclusion conditions are stated, so usage guidance is only implicit.

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