get_outcome

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds the context 'full details', implying comprehensive data, but does not elaborate on behavior like response size, performance, or why openWorldHint might be relevant.

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 a single 12-word sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no extraneous information.

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 read tool with 2 params, no output schema, and safe annotations, the description is adequate. However, it could be more complete by specifying what 'full details' includes (e.g., whether it returns the same fields as other outcome tools).

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters. The description mentions 'by ID' reinforcing outcome_id, but adds no new meaning beyond the schema, such as the purpose of add_defaults.

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 'Get the full details for a specific learning outcome by ID', using a specific verb ('get') and resource ('learning outcome'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_outcome_alignments or get_outcome_results by focusing on the full details of a single outcome.

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 the many sibling outcome-related tools (e.g., get_outcome_alignments, get_outcome_rollups). The description implies use for full details but offers no exclusions or context for selection.

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