Show RFI

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, so agent knows it is safe. Description adds that it returns a JSON object and specifies the API endpoint, providing useful context beyond annotations. No contradictions with 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?

Concise at ~80 words, front-loaded with purpose, then usage and technical details. Every sentence adds value with no repetition or filler.

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?

With annotations present, description covers purpose, required params, API info, and return type. Does not mention pagination params (page, per_page) but they are documented in schema. Slightly ambiguous use of 'records' plural but still complete for a single-object fetch 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 description coverage is 100%; all parameters are described in the schema. Description only reiterates required parameters without adding extra meaning. Meets baseline of 3.

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?

Clearly states it returns detailed info of a specific RFI within a project, with specific verb 'show' and resource 'RFI'. The description explicitly mentions it fetches full details of a specific RFI record, distinguishing it from sibling list_rfis which retrieves multiple RFIs without full details.

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?

Tells agent to use when fetching full details of a specific RFI by its identifier, listing required parameters. Implicitly contrasts with listing tools, but does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternative tool names. Still clear enough for selection.

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