get_request_detail_v1_requests__request_id__get

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

Describes public endpoint and auth-dependent inclusion of upvote state, but does not explicitly state idempotency, rate limits, or data freshness. Since no annotations exist, description provides some behavioral context but insufficient safety guarantees.

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 that front-load the endpoint and title. Efficient but could separate public vs authenticated behavior more clearly.

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 single-parameter GET tool, the description covers key output fields and authentication nuance. However, lacks output schema and does not mention error cases or data format, leaving completeness moderate.

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 coverage is 0% and description only mentions request_id as parameter without additional details like format, examples, or constraints. The tool relies on the name to imply it's a request ID string.

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 the tool retrieves request details, listing specific fields (linked-dataset slug, submitter info, comment count, upvote state). Distinguishes from sibling tools like list_requests (list all) or get_request_admin_detail (admin view).

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?

Implied usage: to get details of a specific request by ID. No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance compared to alternatives like list_requests or list_request_events.

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