get_tag

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states a read operation but gives no details on handling missing IDs, return format, or error behavior. The existing output schema partially covers structure but not behavior.

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 (one sentence), but it underspecifies critical details. It is front-loaded but fails to earn its place by omitting necessary context.

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 existence of an output schema, the description need not explain return values. However, it falls short on usage context, parameter explanation, and differentiation from sibling tools, making it incomplete for a 2-parameter tool with no annotations.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no explanation for the parameters. While tag_id is self-evident, the optional workspace_id parameter is unexplained in both the schema and description, leaving ambiguity about when to provide it.

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 'Get a tag by ID' clearly states the verb (get) and resource (tag), and specifies the retrieval method (by ID). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_tags (list) and get_client by resource name. However, it lacks scope information such as workspace 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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_tags or other get_* tools. The agent receives no information about when to choose this specific retrieval operation.

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