get_tag

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The description does not reveal anything beyond the basic retrieve behavior—no information about error cases (e.g., what happens for a non-existent ID), read-only nature, authentication, or return format. However, 'Retrieve' clearly implies a non-destructive read, which is somewhat self-evident.

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?

One sentence, zero wasted words. Efficient and front-loaded. There is nothing extraneous in this description.

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?

This is a simple single-tag retrieval tool with one documented parameter and no output schema. For a simple read operation, the description is near-adequate. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it could benefit from stating what is returned or handling of not-found cases. Given minimal complexity, it is reasonably complete but leaves a few gaps.

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 documents the single parameter ('id': 'The ID of the tag to retrieve'). The description adds no additional parameter context beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema handles the documentation.

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 'Retrieve a specific tag by ID' clearly states the verb (retrieve), the resource (tag), and the scoping (by ID). It distinguishes from sibling get_tags (list all) by singling out an individual tag. Clear and unambiguous purpose.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_tags (which presumably lists all tags). No exclusions or context provided. The description implies usage (retrieving a single tag) but there is no explicit comparison or selection help.

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