get_finding

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying the returned contents: status, impact, next action, verification guidance, and all evidence rows.

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 tightly written sentences with no wasted words. The core scope is front-loaded, and the default-run note is placed efficiently at the end.

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?

The tool has an output schema, full parameter documentation, and safety annotations, so the description does not need to explain return formats or permissions. It is nearly complete, though it could better clarify its relationship to explain_rule and list_rules.

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 profile, rule_id, and run are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces the default-run behavior but does not add substantial parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific retrieval action and resource: full detail of one rule in a saved run. The scope distinguishes it from list-oriented siblings such as list_rules and from run-level tools like history.

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 by saying it returns detail for one rule in a saved run and defaults to the latest run. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this instead of explain_rule, check, or list_rules.

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