beaconed_optimizations_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'GET' and 'fetch' imply a read-only operation with no side effects, but the description does not explicitly confirm non-mutation or mention authorization, errors, or response shape beyond returning detail.

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?

A single well-structured sentence front-loads the endpoint and immediately states the value returned. Every word is useful, and the description avoids redundancy with the schema.

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?

For a simple one-parameter GET operation with no output schema, the description provides the essential information: which resource to fetch and what the response will include. It does not mention pagination, authentication, or error cases, but those are less critical for a single-resource read.

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?

The schema already fully documents the single parameter `id` as an 'Optimization UUID', and schema coverage is 100%. The description reinforces the endpoint placeholder `{id}` but adds no meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score applies.

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 states a specific HTTP GET operation on a single optimization resource and explicitly says it returns full detail including original and optimized content. This clearly distinguishes it from list-oriented siblings like beaconed_optimizations_list.

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 phrase 'full optimization detail' implies this is the tool to use when complete content is needed rather than a summary, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it. The context is discernible but not made explicit.

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