printix_get_workstation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. 'Get' clearly indicates a read operation with no side effects, but the description does not mention return format, error behavior, or required permissions. For a simple getter, this is adequate but minimal.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to the agent's understanding of the operation and target resource.

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 one-parameter getter with high schema coverage, the description covers the essential selection and invocation context. The lack of an output schema is partially mitigated by the straightforward nature of a 'get' operation, though adding common response or not-found behavior would improve completeness.

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%, so the parameter is already documented as 'Printix workstation ID.' The description repeats the concept without adding new semantic detail such as format, source, or validation rules, so it does not elevate beyond the schema.

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'), the resource ('a single Printix workstation'), and the identifier ('by ID'). It differentiates from list-style siblings by conveying that this is a single-resource lookup, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 phrase 'by ID' implies this tool should be used when the agent already has a specific workstationId and needs that single resource. However, it does not explicitly contrast with printix_list_workstations or state when not to use it, so guidance is only implied.

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