clio_get_bill

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden. It only says 'full detail' without disclosing read-only nature, error behavior, pagination, or response structure. Minimal behavioral disclosure.

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 concise sentence with no wasted words. However, it is so brief that it borders on under-specification, which prevents a perfect score.

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 minimal complexity (one parameter, no output schema), the description still leaves gaps: it does not explain what 'full detail' includes, any limitations, or usage context. Not complete enough for a tool with no annotations or output schema.

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?

The schema lists a single required 'id' number parameter with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not explain what 'id' refers to (e.g., bill ID) or how to obtain it, failing to add meaning beyond the raw 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 'Full detail for one bill,' indicating a retrieval operation for a single bill. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling 'clio_find_bills' which lists bills, though it does not explicitly name the alternative.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus clio_find_bills or other bill-related tools. The description does not mention prerequisites such as obtaining a bill ID or alternative tools for listing bills.

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