get_idea

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

Annotations indicate openWorldHint=true (external access possible) and readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds minimal context beyond 'detailed information'. Fails to address error cases (e.g., invalid ID), cache behavior, or implications of openWorldHint.

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?

Single sentence with front-loaded verb. No redundant words or unnecessary elaboration. Appropriate length for tool complexity.

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?

Adequate for a simple single-parameter read operation with full schema coverage and safety annotations, but lacks completeness regarding error handling and sibling tool relationships that would assist agent selection.

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% with the ideaId parameter fully documented. The description references 'by ID' which aligns with the parameter, but adds no semantic depth regarding ID format or constraints beyond the schema definition.

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 specific verb (Get) and resource (idea), and implies distinction from siblings like list_ideas/search_ideas via 'by ID' phrasing. However, it does not explicitly contrast with the multiple sibling search/list tools.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the available alternatives (list_ideas, query_ideas, search_ideas). Does not indicate prerequisites like needing to obtain the ID first.

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