get_business_case

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

No annotations provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It states what is returned but does not mention permissions, latency, or side effects. The 'Get' verb implies a read operation, but no explicit readOnlyHint. Basic transparency is present.

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?

Two sentences with no redundant information. The first sentence defines the tool's purpose and output, the second provides an alternative. Each sentence adds value.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the return values and provides an alternative tool. It is missing details on error conditions or prerequisites, but it is sufficiently complete for a straightforward read operation.

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 100% documentation coverage for both parameters (blueprintId and customerOrgId) with descriptions. The tool description does not add any additional meaning or usage context beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline.

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 resource ('business case summary for a blueprint'), and lists the returned data (executive summary, ROI numbers, etc.). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'download_blueprint' by noting that tool is for full financial analysis.

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 explicitly provides a when-not-to-use condition: 'For full financial analysis, use download_blueprint.' This helps the agent decide between siblings. It also implies when to use: when a summary is needed.

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