gorelo_get_client

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description carries a lighter burden — but it adds nothing beyond that: no not-found behavior, no permission requirements, no indication of what a client record contains. For a single-record fetch, the null/error case is the main thing an agent needs and it is unaddressed.

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 short sentence with the resource and lookup key front-loaded and zero filler. It is efficient, though its brevity reflects under-specification rather than a tight description of a complex tool.

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?

The tool is simple (one required integer, read-only, no output schema needed for a straightforward fetch), and the description covers the operation and the key. Nothing an agent strictly needs to invoke it correctly is missing, though a note on what a client represents would help.

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?

Only one parameter at 100% schema description coverage ('Client identifier.'), so the schema already does the work. The phrase 'by id' merely restates the required field; no added meaning such as where to obtain the id or whether it is the internal id vs an external reference.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Gets a single client') plus the lookup key ('by id'), which contrasts implicitly with the sibling gorelo_list_clients. It does not explicitly name the list sibling, nor distinguish itself from gorelo_get_contact or other get_* tools, but the verb+resource is unambiguous.

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?

Usage is only implied: fetch one client when you have its id. No explicit when-to-use, no exclusions, and no pointer to gorelo_list_clients for discovery or gorelo_update_client for modification. Adequate but leaves routing to inference.

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