get_tag

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only safety profile is known; the description reinforces this with 'Get'. It adds one behavioral detail beyond the schema—that the result includes matching rules—but does not describe error behavior or the exact return shape.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler; every phrase ('specific', 'by ID', 'full details', 'matching rules') adds information. It is appropriately sized for a simple getter.

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?

Tool complexity is low (one required, read-only parameter), and the description covers the call purpose and what to expect. With no output schema, the exact response fields are left unspecified, but that is a minor gap for such a straightforward single-resource getter.

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 only parameter 'id' has no schema description (0% coverage), but the description identifies it as the tag's identifier, which is the core semantic needed. It does not explain how to obtain a valid tag ID or any constraints beyond the schema's number type, so the compensation is minimal.

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 verb ('Get'), resource ('tag'), and selection criterion ('by ID'), with an added detail that the response includes matching rules. This clearly distinguishes it from list_tags and mutation siblings like create_tag/update_tag/delete_tag.

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 phrase 'a specific tag by ID' conveys the intended use: when the caller has a tag identifier and wants one tag's details. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as list_tags or search for discovery, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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