Get one OT event

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'returns full detail' but does not mention read-only nature, error handling, authentication requirements, or potential side effects (though likely none). This is a significant gap for a tool with zero annotation support.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and contains no filler. Every sentence earns its place: the first states what it does, the second explains when to use it.

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 (one parameter) and the existence of an output schema, the description is largely complete. It covers the main usage context effectively. Minor gaps exist around error behavior and explicit safety, but these are partially mitigated by the clear read-style purpose and the output schema.

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%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'by id' and references event ids from query_events, which adds some context. However, it does not explain the format, constraints, or possible values for event_id beyond what the schema's type 'string' already implies. For a single required param, this is adequate but not exceptional.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Returns full detail for a single OT event by id.' It uses a specific verb ('returns full detail') and resource ('single OT event'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like query_events which likely list multiple events.

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?

Explicit usage guidance is provided: 'Use after `query_events` returns an id of interest, or when a finding or case references a specific event.' This directly tells the agent when to invoke this tool versus alternatives, such as querying for lists of events.

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