Show Response

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, etc. The description adds the endpoint and API area but does not disclose behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide. Since annotations fully cover the safety profile, the description adds minimal value.

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 (four sentences) with purpose front-loaded. It includes useful context like the API endpoint and required parameters without unnecessary content. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 no output schema, the description only vaguely states that a JSON object describing the requested Inspections is returned. It does not explain the pagination parameters (page, per_page) or the return structure. Annotations cover safety but the description is incomplete for a read operation with pagination.

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 for all four parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description only reiterates the required parameters (company_id, id) without adding new meaning. No additional parameter semantics are provided.

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 that the tool returns a specified Response (related to Inspections) and fetches full details by identifier. The verb+resource is clear, though there is a minor inconsistency in referring to 'Inspections' instead of 'Response'. It distinguishes from many show tools but not explicitly.

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 indicates when to use the tool: to fetch full details of a specific Inspection Response by its ID. It also lists required parameters. However, it does not provide guidance on when not to use it or alternative tools (e.g., list_responses), leaving the agent to infer context.

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