get_field

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

No annotations provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as side effects, idempotency, or error handling. For a simple read operation, the lack of readOnlyHint or safety note reduces transparency.

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?

Two sentences, no redundancy. The action and parameter are presented front-loaded with no extraneous information.

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?

With an output schema existing but not shown, the description is minimal. It lacks context like read-only nature, idempotency, or error cases, though a simple getter may be adequately covered. Slightly below ideal completeness.

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 0%, but the description adds meaning: 'Positional identifier returned by list_fields (e.g. "field_0")' – clarifying source, type, and expected format. This compensates for the bare schema.

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?

Clearly states 'Return details of a single field by field_id', specifying the action (return) and resource (details of a single field). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_fields (many fields) and add_field (create).

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?

Explicitly says field_id is 'returned by list_fields' and gives example format, implying prerequisite usage. However, it does not explicitly contrast with other field-related tools or state when to use.

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