slide_get_client

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. 'Get' implies a read-only operation with no side effects, and the scope is clear. However, it does not disclose behavior around missing IDs, errors, or response format, which would add useful transparency for an unannotated tool.

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 earns its place and directly supports tool selection and invocation.

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 retrievable resource with no output schema, this description is largely complete: it names the resource, the scope, and the required lookup key. It could be slightly stronger with mention of not-found behavior or response shape, but nothing essential to invoking the tool correctly is missing.

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% and the only parameter, client_id, is clearly documented in the schema. The description's 'by ID' adds marginal reinforcement but no new semantic detail 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?

Description uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get a single client by ID'. It clearly differentiates itself from list-style siblings like slide_list_clients and other resource-specific getters by scoping to one client.

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 'by ID' phrasing clearly signals this tool is for retrieving one known client, implying it should be used instead of slide_list_clients when a specific client_id is already available. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but context is clear for a simple single-entity getter.

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