Get Tracker filter

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by disclosing what the read returns (stored conditions, query-language string, owner, favourite flag, permissions), which matters because there is no output schema.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with what the resource is, followed by the usage hint. No wasted text, though the opening phrase is slightly clipped.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description supplies the return-content details an agent needs and points to the downstream consumer. Complete enough to call correctly.

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 100% and the single filter_id parameter is fully documented with an example in the schema. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Parameters of a single saved issue filter') and enumerates what the resource contains (conditions, query-language string, owner, favourite flag, access permissions). This clearly separates it from tracker_filters_create/update/delete siblings.

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?

Explicitly says to use it to inspect a filter referenced by id and notes the downstream path (conditions can feed an issues_search query). It gives clear context but does not state exclusions or name a sibling alternative (there is no list sibling here, so this is minor).

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