retrieve_label

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds no extra behavioral context such as error cases, authentication needs, or scoping implications. It merely restates the function name without additional details.

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 sentence with no fluff, but it is under-specified for a tool with two required parameters and no schema descriptions. It is concise in length but lacks essential detail, so it does not fully earn the conciseness credit.

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 retrieve tool with no output schema, the description leaves gaps: it does not indicate what the response will be, why project_id is needed, or any error behavior. Annotations cover safety, but the operational context is incomplete for reliable invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining the parameters. It only mentions 'ID' generically, leaving the roles of label_id and project_id ambiguous. The schema parameter names are self-explanatory, but the description adds no value in clarifying their relationship.

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 ('Retrieve') and the resource ('a label') with the criterion 'by ID'. This distinguishes it from list_labels and other retrieve_* tools, which operate on different resources.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or that both project_id and label_id are required for the retrieval.

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