get_dependency

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

Absent annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, which is correct. However, no additional traits are described (e.g., idempotency, error handling, rate limits). The description is adequate for a simple retrieval but lacks depth.

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 with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the key action and resource, making it extremely efficient for an agent to parse.

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?

Despite low complexity (1 parameter, output schema exists), the description is incomplete. It does not elaborate on the parameter's meaning or usage context. The existence of an output schema partially compensates for return value documentation, but the parameter remains undocumented, making the description insufficient for proper tool invocation.

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 0%, meaning no parameter descriptions in the schema. The description only mentions 'by ID', which is redundant given the parameter name 'dependency_id'. It adds no semantic value beyond what the schema already provides, failing to explain the parameter's format, source, or constraints.

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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'tracked dependency by ID', making its purpose immediately obvious. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'list_dependencies' (which lists all) and 'delete_dependency' (which deletes), as it specifies retrieval by a unique identifier.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the purpose is clear, there is no mention of prerequisites, common scenarios, or exclusions (e.g., 'Use this when you have a specific dependency ID; otherwise use list_dependencies').

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