Get Bid Board Project By Id

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds that it returns a JSON object and mentions required parameters. This is consistent but does not significantly augment the behavioral traits beyond the annotations.

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 three sentences, including API version and endpoint. It is front-loaded with the purpose. It could be slightly more concise, but overall it is well-structured and efficient.

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?

The tool retrieves a single record by ID and returns a JSON object. The description covers the essentials. Although pagination parameters exist, they are not relevant for fetching a single record. The description is complete for the tool's primary use.

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 documents all parameters. The description lists the two required parameters but omits page and per_page. It adds no extra meaning beyond the schema descriptions, scoring baseline 3.

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 the tool fetches a Bid Board project by ID. It specifies the verb 'Get' and the resource 'Bid Board project'. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_all_bid_board_projects' or 'clone_bid_board_project', which would help an agent select the correct one.

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?

The description explicitly says 'Use this to fetch the full details of a specific Bid Board records by its identifier.' This gives a clear use case. It does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives, but the context is straightforward.

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