freshbooks_get_record

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

Annotations already mark the tool readOnlyHint=true, and the description consistently describes a read operation ('Get a single record'). It adds a useful nuance about numeric ids also accepting strings, but it does not go beyond that to disclose auth requirements, error behavior, or response shape. With annotations covering the safety profile, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

Two concise sentences with no filler. The action and scope are front-loaded, and the id-type clarification is the only supporting detail. Every sentence earns its place.

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 two-parameter read-only tool with a comprehensive enum and 100% schema coverage, the description is almost sufficient. It clearly tells the agent what to pass (resource name and id). The only gap is that no output schema exists and the description does not describe the returned record shape, but for a simple getter this is a minor omission.

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 both parameters fully. The description's id flexibility note is already reflected in the schema's anyOf for integer/string and the 'numeric for all currently mapped resources' text. The description adds little semantic value beyond what the structured schema provides.

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 tool gets a single record from any mapped FreshBooks accounting resource by name and id. The word 'any' plus the resource-and-id framing distinguishes it from the many specific sibling getters like get_invoice or get_client. This is a specific verb + resource with clear scope.

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 implies usage when you know the resource name and record id, and the generic 'any resource' phrasing suggests it is the fallback across the enum of resources. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over the dedicated get_* siblings or list_records, nor does it mention any exclusions.

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