linda_get_issue

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. The description only states what the tool returns, leaving the agent uninformed about safety or permissions.

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 concise with only two sentences, front-loading the core purpose and grouping detail. Every word adds value without redundancy.

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, no output schema), the description is adequate but could be more complete by hinting at the output structure or error behavior. It lacks details on return format or potential issues like invalid IDs.

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% for the single parameter 'id', and the description adds a brief explanation and example in German, but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema. The schema already specifies the parameter format and example, so the description offers minimal extra value.

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 verb 'Liefert' (delivers) and the resource 'Inhaltsverzeichnis' (table of contents) of a magazine issue. It distinguishes from siblings like linda_get_document and linda_get_see_also by specifying the specific use case of retrieving the issue table of contents grouped by sections.

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 description implies usage for retrieving a magazine issue's table of contents but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like linda_search or linda_get_document. No exclusions or alternative tool names are mentioned.

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