bookshelf_get_config_downloadclient_by_id

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

The description is consistent with the readOnlyHint annotation ('Fetch' implies a read operation). However, it adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations already convey. There is no mention of potential side effects, response format, or any rate/access constraints, but for a simple read operation, the minimal disclosure is acceptable.

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, clear sentence that is appropriately brief for a simple fetch operation. It front-loads the action and resource. While minimal, it avoids unnecessary words and repetition, making it efficient.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, readOnlyHint, and an output schema), the description sufficiently captures the essential purpose. There is no need to explain return values since an output schema exists. The description covers the core function without leaving major gaps for an agent.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate, but it only repeats the parameter name ('by id') without explaining the nature of the id (e.g., what it references, how it relates to config downloadclients, or any constraints). This adds little value beyond the schema's raw type declaration.

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 'Fetch a single config downloadclient by id' clearly states the action (fetch), the resource (config downloadclient), and the scope (single, by id). It distinguishes from list-type tools and other 'get' tools by specifying 'single...by id', though it doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools like bookshelf_get_config_downloadclient.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or context such as when to prefer the list version or the non-config variant. Usage must be inferred purely from the name and description.

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