Get work order

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile: read-only, idempotent, open-world, non-destructive. The description adds useful return-content detail: project, customer, status, dates, location, notes, and line items with quantity, unit cost, and total. It does not discuss errors or auth, but for an annotated read tool this is reasonably transparent.

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 short and structured, first listing returned fields and then explaining the ID-based read and its delta over list_work_orders. It is slightly fragmentary at the start but contains no wasted sentences.

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 one-parameter read tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the description supplies enough return-field detail for an agent to understand what it will get. Nothing essential for correct invocation appears to be missing.

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%, and the single parameter is already documented as a work_order_id from list_work_orders. The description reinforces that identifier source but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 names a specific verb and resource: it reads one Contractor Foreman work order by work_order_id. It also distinguishes the tool from list_work_orders by saying this returns the list fields plus location, notes, and line items.

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 comparison to list_work_orders gives clear context for when to use this tool: when a single work order with extra detail is needed. It does not explicitly state exclusions or prerequisites, but the intended usage is clear.

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