get-tag

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only indicates a read operation ('returns'), but omits important details like authentication requirements, rate limits, whether the operation is idempotent, or what 'metadata' entails. This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 sentence and very concise. However, it is too minimal and could benefit from additional context without becoming verbose. It is not 'wasteful,' but it is also not optimally informative for the agent.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one required parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. It tells the agent the basic purpose but does not explain the return format or any side effects. While not incomplete, it leaves room for uncertainty about the tool's full behavior.

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 coverage is 100%, and the parameter 'tagId' is already described as 'The identifier of the Tag.' The description does not add any new semantic information about the parameter beyond what the schema provides. Per guidelines, baseline 3 is appropriate when schema coverage is high and description adds no extra context.

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?

Clearly states that the tool 'returns the metadata of a Tag identified by the tagId.' The verb 'returns' combined with the resource 'metadata of a Tag' makes the purpose unambiguous. It is distinct from sibling tools like create-tag, delete-tag, and list-tags, which have different actions.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list-tags or update-tag. It only states what the tool does, without any contextual advice, prerequisites, or exclusions. This forces the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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