rb209_grass_sward_management

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states the HTTP method (GET) and the outcome (returns the sward management text), making the read-only, non-destructive nature clear. It does not discuss error cases or response formatting, but for a single-ID lookup this is adequate.

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?

A single sentence with the endpoint front-loaded and the purpose stated immediately. No filler or redundant explanations.

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 one-parameter, no-output-schema, no-annotation lookup tool, the description explains both the input (an id) and the return (text), so an agent can invoke it correctly. A small gap is the lack of any explicit relationship to plural sibling endpoints.

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%, so the schema already documents swardManagementId as an integer with a clear description. The tool description adds no extra parameter-level meaning beyond restating that this id is "provided."

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 uses a specific verb (GET) and a specific resource (sward management by ID), and the {swardManagementId} path clearly marks this as a singular lookup, distinguishing it from sibling list tools such as rb209_grass_sward_managements.

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?

Usage is implied: call this tool when you have a specific sward management id and need its text. However, there is no explicit guidance about when not to use it or a pointer to alternative list endpoints like rb209_grass_sward_managements.

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