Show Action Plan Section

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description's mention of 'Returns a JSON object' adds little behavioral context. No contradictions, but the description does not elaborate on rate limits, pagination behavior, or other nuances beyond 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?

Description is concise (5 sentences) with front-loaded purpose and view parameter details. Some redundancy (e.g., repeating 'Returns' and 'fetch details') could be trimmed, but overall it is well-structured.

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's mention of 'Returns a JSON object' is sufficient but vague. It covers the view parameter and required params. Adding response field examples would improve completeness, but current is adequate for a simple retrieval tool.

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%, but the description adds value by explaining the view parameter options ('normal' vs 'extended' with nested plan_items) beyond the schema's enum descriptions. It also highlights required parameters.

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 'Returns an Action Plan Section' and explains the view parameter for fetching full details. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like list_action_plan_sections (for listing) or show_action_plan (for plans), relying on the name and context.

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 tells when to use ('fetch the full details of a specific Action Plans by its identifier') and specifies required parameters. It does not provide guidance on when not to use or mention alternatives (e.g., listing vs. showing).

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