sam_get_opportunity

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. Description adds detail on what is returned (title, POCs, attachments, etc.) and the action is clearly read-only. 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?

Two concise sentences: first covers purpose and return fields, second covers when to use. Front-loaded with verb and resource. No superfluous 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?

For a simple get-by-ID tool, description covers input format, output fields, and usage context. No output schema, but list of returned fields is sufficient. Agent can correctly select and invoke.

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 sole parameter noticeId is described both in the schema and the description as '32-char hex notice id'. Schema coverage is 100%, so description adds no new semantic beyond what 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 verb 'Fetch' and the resource 'full detail for a single SAM.gov notice', listing key fields returned. It distinguishes from sibling search tools (e.g., sam_search_opportunities) by specifying it is for a single notice by ID.

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 states 'Call BEFORE drafting bid/no-bid or compliance work', providing clear usage context. Does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the command is strong enough to guide selection.

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