Show Company Action Plan Template Item Assignee

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint: true, destructiveHint: false, idempotentHint: true, and openWorldHint: true, indicating a safe, read-only operation. The description adds that it returns a JSON object and includes API details, but does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond what annotations already convey.

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 concise with four sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and includes required parameters and API endpoint. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundant or missing 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?

Given the simplicity (single resource retrieval) and rich annotations, the description is adequate. However, it does not explain the optional pagination parameters (page, per_page) which seem out of place for a show endpoint, and it lacks detail on the return object fields beyond 'JSON object.'

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description only reinforces required parameters (company_id, id) but does not add meaning beyond the schema. Optional parameters (page, per_page) are not explained in the description.

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 states 'Details of a single Company Action Plan Template Item Assignee' and 'fetch the full details of a specific Action Plans by its identifier.' The purpose is clear, but there is a minor inconsistency: it mentions 'Action Plans' instead of 'Action Plan Template Item Assignee.' The verb 'show' and resource are specific, and it distinguishes from the sibling list endpoint.

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 provides clear usage context by stating 'Use this to fetch the full details' and lists required parameters. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare it with alternatives like the list endpoint for assignees.

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