Contract Testing: Get BDCT Consumer by Consumer Version

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds no behavioral details beyond what the annotations provide, and does not disclose return format or potential prerequisites.

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 short but includes a redundant parameter list already present in the schema. The 'Toolset' header provides some context but could be omitted for brevity. Not optimally concise.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should explain the return value structure. It only says 'Fetch the consumer Pact contract' without details. Given the complexity of BDCT, more context about what the contract contains would be helpful.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents the parameters. The description repeats the parameter names and types verbatim without additional semantic context, adding no value beyond the 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?

The description clearly states it fetches a consumer Pact contract for a specific consumer-provider version pair. It differentiates from the sibling tool contract-testing_get_bdct_consumer_contracts (plural) by focusing on a single version pair, but does not explicitly mention alternatives.

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 other similar BDCT tools (e.g., get_bdct_provider_by_consumer_version) or when not to use it. The description only states the function without context for selection.

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