rca_analysis_get_result

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description's burden is lower. The description adds 'previously saved' implying it does not create new data. However, it does not disclose edge cases (e.g., missing result_id) or authentication requirements. This is adequate given the annotations.

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 of 8 words, highly concise, and front-loaded with the verb and object. Every word is necessary; no wasted text.

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 existence of an output schema, the return format is covered. The tool has 3 parameters (token, client_id, result_id) and annotations cover safety. However, the description does not explain the token parameter's role or optional client_id, which are essential for correct use. It is barely adequate for a simple retrieval but missing key context.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain parameters. It only mentions 'result_id' implicitly in the phrase 'by result_id', but fails to describe 'token' (authentication) and 'client_id' (namespace). These omissions leave the agent unclear on required auth and optional scoping.

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 uses the clear verb 'Retrieve' with the resource 'previously saved RCA result' and specifies the identifier 'by result_id'. This clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like rca_analysis_list_results (list) and rca_analysis_query_results (query). The purpose is unambiguous.

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, no prerequisites (e.g., need a valid token), and no context on the expected state of the result_id. Without explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions, an agent may misuse this tool.

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