Read back a saved triage profile

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

Adds substantial context beyond the annotations: it never re-reads the photo or calls the model, spends nothing from the daily allowance, exposes no contact details, needs no key, and is rate limited to 20 reads/hour shared with assessments. These privacy, cost and throttling facts are exactly what an agent needs and none are in the structured fields.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded and every clause carries real information (cost, privacy, auth, rate limit). It is somewhat run-on and could be tightened, but no sentence is filler.

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 read-only, single-param tool with an output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: where the id comes from, that no key/cost is involved, privacy guarantees and the rate limit. Return values are handled by the output schema.

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%, and the description's note that the id is the last path segment of a /c/ link duplicates what the schema already says. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the parameter 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?

States a specific verb (Returns) and resource (a saved fixRAgent assessment) plus how to obtain the diagnosis_id. It is clearly distinguishable from assess_property_photo and try_sample, whose names imply generation rather than read-back.

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?

Gives clear context: this is the retrieval path for a saved assessment, and the id comes from an assessment or a fixragent.com/c/ link. It stops short of explicitly contrasting when to pick this over the sibling assess/try tools, leaving that routing to inference.

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