Get Company Item

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. The description adds that the tool returns dimensions, which goes beyond annotations but is minimal. No contradictions.

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 two sentences and front-loaded with the core purpose. It is efficient with no wasted words, though it could be slightly expanded.

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 get-by-ID tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers basic purpose and parameter. However, it lacks details about the exact structure of the returned item, possible error conditions, or any additional context that might be helpful. Annotations compensate somewhat.

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 100% and the schema already describes the 'id' parameter with 'Item ID'. The description merely restates this, adding no new meaning. Baseline is 3 given full schema coverage.

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 tool returns a single saved item (product/SKU) with dimensions by ID. It uses a specific verb ('returns') and resource ('single saved item'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'machship_get_items' (plural) and 'machship_get_item_by_sku' (by SKU).

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 such as 'machship_get_item_by_sku' or 'machship_get_item_complex'. It does not mention exclusions or prerequisites.

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