gorelo_get_ticket

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states it returns 'full detail', without mentioning that it is read-only, what happens on missing/invalid IDs, error handling, or any potential cost/rate implications. The description is minimal and does not add behavioral context beyond the obvious.

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 a single short sentence, which is highly concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it is terse to the point of being under-specified, but that is a completeness issue rather than a structure issue. It earns a 4 for efficiency.

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 get-by-id operation, the description is minimally adequate but lacks important context such as the expected return format, whether it is read-only, or any error behavior. With no output schema and no annotations, more detail would help an agent understand what 'full detail' entails and how to handle edge cases.

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 already provides 100% coverage for the single parameter (ticketId with 'Ticket id (UUID).'). The description's 'by id' adds no new semantic meaning, so it does not elevate beyond the schema's clarity. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the action ('Get') and the resource ('a single ticket by id'), with 'full detail' indicating the richness of the response. It is distinct from sibling tools like gorelo_list_tickets (which lists) and gorelo_get_ticket_comment (which targets a comment), though it doesn't explicitly call out the difference.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when to prefer gorelo_list_tickets or any other sibling, nor any context about prerequisites such as having a valid ticket ID. The usage context is entirely implied.

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