Retrieve a specific worker set by its ID from the Rockfish AI platform. Use this to fetch worker set details for synthetic data generation and ML workflow orchestration.
Get a specific worker set by ID
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Worker set ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state that this is a read-only operation, whether permissions are required, or what happens when the ID is missing or invalid. Only the bare retrieval action is conveyed.
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, front-loaded sentence with zero redundancy. It efficiently conveys the core action and lookup key without 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?
For a simple one-parameter read tool with full schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it omits useful context such as return shape, error behavior, or how it relates to sibling tools that retrieve related worker set data.
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 single 'id' parameter is already documented in the schema as 'Worker set ID'. The description adds only the phrase 'by ID', which aligns with the schema but does not add format, constraints, or examples beyond what is provided.
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 ('worker set'), and clarifies the lookup key ('by ID'). It distinguishes the tool from list_worker_sets implicitly by specifying a single item rather than a list, but it does not name or compare against siblings like list_worker_sets or get_worker_set_actions.
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 provides no explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_worker_sets or get_worker_set_actions. The requirement of an ID is implied by 'by ID' and the schema, but there is no stated context, prerequisite, or exclusion.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.