storyline_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the default return detail (full) and the composition of each detail level, providing useful transparency about output verbosity. No side effects are mentioned, which is acceptable for a read operation.

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 filler. The main action and default behavior are front-loaded, and the detail-level guidance is compact.

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 single-get tool with full schema coverage and a clear output description, this is nearly complete. Medium detail is only described as 'compact summary,' but the schema provides the exact semantics, so the description is sufficient.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds value by tying detail levels to storyline-specific content (full includes brief, strategy, line items, status; short returns id,title,status), enriching the schema's generic detail descriptions.

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 a single storyline by ID' and enumerates the included state fields (brief, strategy, line items, status), making it distinct from sibling list/get_strategy tools.

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 intended usage is clear: retrieving one storyline by ID. It provides guidance on detail level choices (full/medium/short) but does not explicitly name alternative tools like storyline_list or storyline_get_strategy, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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