get_hr_service

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds that the response includes tasks and SLAs, but does not disclose behaviors like exact-name matching limitations, error handling, or response envelope. This is acceptable given the read-only annotation but not rich.

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 that states the action and key included content without any filler. Every word contributes to the meaning.

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 read-only lookup, the description adequately covers purpose and expected content (tasks and SLAs). It could mention exact-name matching or explicitly differentiate from list_hr_services, but the tool's simplicity and the readOnlyHint annotation make it sufficiently complete.

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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter sys_id_or_name already explains it accepts a sys_id or exact name. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond restating that it targets a specific service, so the schema carries the full burden.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and identifies the resource ('specific HR service') along with the included content ('tasks and SLAs'). It clearly differentiates from siblings like list_hr_services by targeting a single service lookup rather than a list.

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 phrase 'specific HR service' implies this is for single-item lookup by sys_id_or_name, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_hr_services. Usage context is implied but not fully articulated.

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