get_plan

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

No annotations provided. The description only states 'Get a specific test plan by ID', implying a read-only operation, but does not disclose behavior on missing IDs, error handling, or any side effects. The description lacks needed transparency.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a single phrase. It contains no fluff but is perhaps too brief; it could benefit from additional context without sacrificing conciseness.

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 single parameter, no output schema, and the sibling toolset, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the core action but omits return value context or any edge cases, making it moderately complete.

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 100% for the single parameter plan_id, which is described as 'Plan ID'. The tool description adds 'by ID' reinforcing the parameter purpose but does not add new meaning beyond the schema.

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 specific test plan by ID' clearly states the verb and resource, distinguishing from sibling tools like get_plans which lists plans. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from similar tools like get_case or get_suite, but the resource is specific enough.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_plans for listing. The description implies usage for a single plan but does not mention prerequisites or when not to use it.

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