kaiten_get_sd_service

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the retrieval action; it does not explicitly confirm side-effect-free behavior, mention whether any permissions are required, or describe what is returned. The verb 'Get' implies read-only, but no additional behavioral context is disclosed.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence states exactly what the tool does with no filler or redundant elaboration. Every word earns its place.

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 single-parameter getter this is nearly adequate, but with no output schema the description does not mention return value shape, error conditions, or any special behaviors. Given the low complexity, these gaps are relatively minor but still leave an agent to infer the response format.

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 schema fully documents the only parameter (service_id, type integer, description 'Service ID') with 100% coverage. The description's 'by ID' phrase merely restates the schema; it adds no extra meaning about formats, constraints, or source of the ID.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get'), a concrete resource ('Service Desk service'), and a scoping mechanism ('by ID'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like kaiten_list_sd_services (which lists services) and kaiten_create_sd_service (which creates one), even without naming them.

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 intended usage is implied: call this when you have a specific service_id and need the corresponding service object. However, there is no explicit guidance about when not to use it or which alternative to choose (e.g., kaiten_list_sd_services for browsing), leaving a small gap in routing the agent.

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