investigation_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It states 'Get' implying read-only, but does not mention error handling, idempotency, or what happens if the ID does not exist. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return format, but behavioral gaps remain.

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 concise sentence (6 words), efficiently conveying the core purpose. It is appropriately sized for a simple get-by-id tool, though it sacrifices parameter elaboration.

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 (1 required parameter, output schema exists), the description is minimally adequate. It covers the essential action and resource, but lacks details on error conditions or prerequisites.

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 says 'by ID', which adds minimal value since the parameter name 'note_id' already suggests it is the ID. No format, example, or constraints are given.

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 'Get a single investigation entry by ID' clearly states the verb (Get), resource (investigation entry), and the method (by ID). This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like investigation_list (list all) and investigation_add (create).

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 you have a specific ID and want a single entry, differentiating it from investigation_list (likely returns multiple) or investigation_add (creates). However, no explicit when-not or alternative scenarios are provided.

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