get_single_recurring_item

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description does not need to repeat that. It adds value by explaining that the optional date range populates the 'matches' object, which is behavioral information beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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 extremely concise at just two sentences. The first sentence delivers the core purpose, and the second provides key additional context (date range effect). Every word is functional with no waste.

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 (single retrieval with optional date range), the description is largely complete. It covers the core functionality and the optional parameter effect. However, there is no output schema, and the description does not detail the response structure beyond 'matches,' which could be a minor gap for agents needing to parse the result.

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%, so the schema already documents parameters well. The description adds context by stating that the date range populates the 'matches' object, linking the parameters to the functionality. This provides meaning beyond the schema's descriptions.

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 'Retrieve a single recurring item by ID,' which is a specific verb and resource. It also mentions the optional date range for populating the matches object, adding clarity. The tool is distinct from its sibling 'get_recurring_items' which lists all items.

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 implies usage context by noting that the recurringId should be obtained from 'get_recurring_items' first. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide conditions for when not to use it. The guidance is minimal.

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