get_service_lines_by_service_line_number

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations by specifying the HTTP method (GET) and required permission. This helps the agent understand the operation's nature and access requirements. The annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior, and the description aligns with them.

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 extremely concise, consisting of only two parts: the action and the permission requirement, plus the HTTP method in brackets. Every element is essential and placed upfront, with no redundant or extraneous text.

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 read-by-ID operation with no output schema, the description provides the core details (action, permission, endpoint). However, it does not mention the structure or type of the return value, which would help the agent interpret the response. Given the simplicity, it is minimally complete but could be more informative.

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 a clear description of the only parameter ('Service line number'), achieving 100% coverage. The tool description does not add any additional semantic detail about the parameter, so a baseline score 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 service line') and the resource. Combined with the required parameter 'serviceLineNumber', it unambiguously indicates retrieval of a single service line by its number, distinguishing it from the sibling 'get_service_lines' which lists all lines.

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 description specifies the required permission ('Service plan, View'), which helps the agent determine authorization. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_service_lines' or other read tools, leaving the agent to infer from the name.

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