Get wFirma contractor

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the 'explicitly selected client company' requirement, which is useful context, but it doesn't address not-found behavior, response structure, or verification 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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. Every word earns its place, delivering the action, resource, and scope quickly.

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 low-complexity, 2-parameter read with rich annotations and fully described schema, the description is sufficient to select and invoke the tool. The only minor gap is no explicit statement about the return shape, but the verb 'Read' and resource name make that inferable.

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%: both parameters have meaningful descriptions, including the warning 'Never use a NIP here' for companyId. The description adds no additional parameter-level nuance, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Description clearly says 'Read one contractor' with a specific resource and scope ('from one explicitly selected wFirma client company'), which distinguishes it from list_contractors. It doesn't name a sibling tool, but the singular 'one' and 'explicitly selected' make the targeted nature clear.

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 phrasing implies this tool is for retrieving a single contractor when you already have a specific companyId and id. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with wfirma_list_contractors or other get_* tools, and gives no when-not-to-use guidance.

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