Get client

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds that the result contains 'full details', which is a useful expectation of the output, but it does not discuss errors, rate limits, or other behavioral traits.

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 entire description is one short sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the action and object, making it easy to scan.

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?

For a simple read operation with one parameter and annotations covering safety, the description is adequate. It communicates the return scope ('full details') but does not describe the exact fields or error cases, which is a minor gap given the lack of an output schema.

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 schema only defines clientId as a non-empty string; the description's 'by id' clarifies that this parameter is the client identifier. It adds little beyond that, leaving the source or format of the id unspecified.

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 the verb 'Fetch' and the resource 'full details of a single client by id', clearly distinguishing this from sibling list or search tools. The phrase 'single client by id' differentiates it from list_clients and get_client_open_docs.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like list_clients or get_client_open_docs. It only describes the operation, leaving the agent to infer that it should be used when a specific client id is known.

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