Show Action Plan Template Receiver

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the description does not need to repeat these. It adds context about the API endpoint and required parameters but no additional behavioral traits. This is adequate given 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 very concise at four sentences, each serving a clear purpose: stating the resource, usage guidance, return type, and required parameters with API info. It is front-loaded with the most important information.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with good annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: what it returns, when to use it, required parameters. It does not mention the optional pagination parameters (page, per_page) and whether they are relevant for a single item fetch, which is a minor gap.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description restates the required parameters (project_id, id) and provides the endpoint URL, which helps contextualize the parameters. It does not add deeper meaning 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 the tool returns an Action Plan Template Receiver and fetches its full details. It uses specific verbs like 'Returns' and 'fetch'. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like list_action_plan_template_receivers or show_action_plan_template_approver, though the resource name is specific enough.

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 says 'Use this to fetch the full details of a specific Action Plans by its identifier,' which implies the use case. However, it does not provide when-not-to-use guidance or mention alternative tools (e.g., list_action_plan_template_receivers for listing all receivers).

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