Show Recycled Action

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds that it 'Returns a JSON object', which is consistent. No contradictions. It does not disclose extra behavioral traits beyond annotations, such as pagination specifics, but annotations carry the main burden.

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 moderately concise but includes redundancy (e.g., repeating 'Returns a specific Recycled Action' and 'Returns a JSON object describing the requested Incidents'). The API endpoint details add bulk; could be streamlined.

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 retrieval tool, the description covers purpose and required params but lacks explanation of 'Recycled Action' context (e.g., what recycling means for actions). No output schema is provided, so description doesn't need to detail return fields, but some context about how the action is retrieved would improve completeness.

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% with descriptions for all parameters. The description mentions only 'Required parameters: project_id, id', which duplicates the schema's required field. No additional meaning is added beyond the schema for optional parameters like incident_id, page, per_page.

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 it returns a specific Recycled Action (incident action), with the verb 'Returns' and resource, and distinguishes from siblings by specifying the context of recycled incident actions. However, it is slightly inconsistent in referring to 'Incidents' (plural) and uses 'Incidents' rather than 'Incident'.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like 'show_recycled_incident' or 'retrieve_recycled_action'. It only implies usage via the purpose statement, lacking when or when-not context.

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