retrieve_work_item

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

Annotations already declare this as a safe read-only operation. The description adds useful behavioral context by suggesting expand=relations,assignees,labels, indicating how to get full details. However, it doesn't disclose response format or potential error cases, but the tool's simplicity makes this adequate.

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?

Three concise sentences with no wasted words. The key information is front-loaded, and each sentence earns its place, including the explicit alternative guidance.

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 straightforward read-only retrieval tool, the description covers the main usage, the required identifier type, and an important expansion option. The absence of an output schema is mitigated by the tool's simple nature. It lacks details on optional fields, but these are secondary.

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. It clarifies that work_item_id is a UUID and gives useful values for expand. However, it does not explain project_id or the fields parameter, leaving some semantics to be inferred from parameter names.

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 retrieves a single work item by UUID, with a specific verb and resource. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling tool retrieve_work_item_by_identifier, eliminating ambiguity.

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 explicit guidance: use this tool when you have a UUID, and use retrieve_work_item_by_identifier when you have a human-readable key like DEV-42. It also recommends the expand parameter for fuller details.

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