get_work_order

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a behavioral detail about the 'plain' flag using the show_plain endpoint, which is useful, but it does not explain the behavior when plain=false or other runtime aspects like errors or response formats.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and a concise technical detail. There is no fluff or redundancy, making it highly efficient and well-structured.

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, output schema, and annotations, the description covers the basic purpose. However, it does not disambiguate from closely related sibling tools (search_work_orders, get_work_order_service_report) or fully explain the 'plain' flag, leaving gaps in context for proper tool selection.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only partially explains 'plain' by relating it to an endpoint, but does not explain work_order_id or what plain=false does. This leaves the agent with incomplete understanding of the parameters.

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 states 'Fetch one work order,' which is a specific verb+resource combination. The word 'one' helps differentiate it from search_work_orders, but it does not explicitly name sibling tools or contrast itself, so it lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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 when a single work order is needed, and the required work_order_id parameter suggests having the ID. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_work_orders or get_work_order_service_report, and no exclusions are provided.

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