appwrite_get_execution

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Compensates partially by disclosing what data is returned (response, logs, timing), which helps since no output schema exists. However, lacks safety disclosure (read-only vs destructive), auth requirements, or rate limiting information.

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?

Single sentence with information-dense structure. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix appears to be categorization metadata; the core sentence 'Get execution details including response, logs, and timing' is front-loaded and efficient without filler.

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?

Without output schema, the description usefully lists return contents (response, logs, timing). However, with 3 required parameters at 0% schema coverage, the description fails to provide necessary parameter documentation, creating a significant gap for a retrieval tool.

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 has 0% description coverage for all 3 required parameters (site, function_id, execution_id). Description mentions 'execution' which loosely maps to execution_id, but provides no semantics for 'site' (likely project/endpoint) or 'function_id', leaving critical input parameters undocumented.

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?

Clearly states the tool retrieves 'execution details' and specifically mentions what data is returned (response, logs, timing). Verb is specific ('Get'), resource is clear ('execution'). Could improve by explicitly mentioning 'function' to distinguish from other execution types, though 'function_id' parameter provides context.

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?

No guidance provided on when to use this versus the sibling 'appwrite_list_executions' or 'appwrite_execute_function'. Missing prerequisites—does not mention that execution_id typically comes from executing a function or listing executions first.

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