get_prompt

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses account-scoping and 404 behavior, but does not explicitly state read-only nature, idempotency, or permissions. Adequate but could be more thorough.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded purpose, then usage and behavioral details. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Covers purpose, return contents (template, variables, labels, description), id provenance, scoping, and error behavior. For a simple get-by-id tool without output schema, this is fully complete.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by instructing to use prompts[].id from list_prompts as-is, which is beyond the schema's description. This provides practical context for the parameter.

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 'Fetch one prompt's detail by id,' specifying the verb, resource, and method. It distinguishes from siblings like list_prompts (multiple) and get_deployed_prompt (deployed version) by mentioning the id usage and what is included.

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?

It explicitly advises using prompts[].id from list_prompts, providing a direct link to the source of the id. It also notes account scoping and 404 behavior for invalid ids, guiding proper usage. Lacks explicit mention of alternatives like get_deployed_prompt but context is clear.

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