coda_get_row

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

No annotations are available, so the description must convey behavioral traits. The brief text does not specify that the operation is read-only, what happens if the row is missing, or any permission requirements, leaving the agent with minimal context about side effects or error behavior.

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 extremely concise at one sentence and six words, which is efficient for a simple read operation. However, it borders on under-specification, sacrificing useful context for brevity.

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?

With five parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the return value format, error handling, or how to construct the required identifiers, making the tool incomplete for an agent to reliably use.

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 0% per context, and the description does not explain any parameters (e.g., how to specify docId, tableIdOrName, rowIdOrName, or the optional useColumnNames and valueFormat). The description fails to compensate for the missing schema 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 'Get a specific row from a table' clearly states the action (get) and resource (specific row), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like coda_list_rows (list multiple rows) or coda_update_row (modify a row).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as coda_list_rows for fetching multiple rows or coda_get_table for table metadata. The description doesn't exclude any contexts or mention prerequisites.

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