getMenu

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

The description discloses the lean-by-default keep-list structure, how to restore extras via include_extras=1, the return format (status, message array containing record), and the read-only nature. Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and the description aligns perfectly with no contradictions.

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 well-structured with clear sections (purpose, lean-by-default, use when, required, see also, returns). It is concise yet informative, with each sentence providing distinct value. No wasted words.

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 no output schema, the description fully explains the return format and the lean-by-default behavior. It also addresses when to use this tool versus listMenus. For a read-only single-record retrieval tool, this is complete.

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 description adds meaning beyond the input schema by explaining that menu_id is required and that include_extras restores 'styling/target/rel/json_meta'. Since the schema only describes include_extras in detail, the description compensates for the missing menu_id description and clarifies the extras behavior.

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 ('Get', 'fetch') and resource (single menu record). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'listMenus' by saying 'Child items are fetched separately' and 'See also: listMenus (enumerate many).'

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 provides explicit guidance with 'Use when: fetching one menu's metadata' and contrasts with when to use a sibling tool. It also states the required parameter and the lean-by-default vs extras behavior.

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