get_action

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions checking 'progress or status', hinting at read-only behavior, but doesn't explicitly state whether it's safe, idempotent, or has side effects. For a retrieval tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps 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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose ('Get a single action by ID') and adds clarifying context in parentheses, making it easy to parse.

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 retrieval tool with 1 parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose and usage hint, but lacks details on authentication, error handling, or return format, which could be important given the absence of annotations and output schema.

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 input schema has 1 parameter with 0% description coverage. The description adds value by specifying 'by ID' and implying it's a numeric ID, but doesn't detail format, constraints, or examples beyond the schema. With low schema coverage, it partially compensates but not fully.

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 tool's purpose: 'Get a single action by ID' specifies the verb (get) and resource (action), with an example clarifying the scope. It distinguishes from sibling 'list_actions' by focusing on a single item, though it doesn't explicitly name the sibling.

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 provides implied usage context with 'e.g. to check progress or status after create/delete', suggesting it's for follow-up operations. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this versus 'list_actions' or other alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites like needing a valid action ID.

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