azdo_get_team

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It merely states 'Get team details' with no mention of read-only nature, required permissions, error handling, or output format. This is insufficient for an agent to understand invocation implications.

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?

At two words, the description is extremely concise but lacks substantive content. It is front-loaded but does not earn its place with useful information beyond the tool name.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain return values or behavior. It does not, leaving the agent uninformed about what details are retrieved or potential side effects.

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% with basic field descriptions (e.g., 'AzDO project name'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 'Get team details', which clearly identifies the action and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'azdo_get_team_board' or 'azdo_list_teams' by focusing on generic details, but lacks specificity on what exactly is included.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Siblings like 'azdo_list_teams' for listing or 'azdo_get_team_board' for board-specific info are not mentioned, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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