getWidget

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

Discloses lean-by-default behavior (keep-list stripping code fields), explains include_code parameter to restore them, and notes the return format. Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive; description adds valuable context on default response and when to use include_code.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections (lean-by-default, use when, required, see also, returns). Every sentence informative, no redundancy. Appropriate length for comprehensive tool description.

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 2 params, one optional enum, no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, parameters with semantics, return format, and related tools. Complete and self-contained.

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?

Adds meaning beyond schema: clarifies widget_id is required path parameter, explains include_code as opt-in for code fields and its necessity before updateWidget. Schema coverage is 50%, description compensates fully.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get a single widget' and 'Fetch a single widget record by widget_id', with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like listWidgets (enumerate) and updateWidget (modify).

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 'Use when: you have a widget_id... and want the widget's SOURCE code to edit or audit.' Provides alternative for preview via shortcode. Lists see-also references for enumeration and modification.

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