get_item

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation: it explains the fuzzy fallback ('first keyword match') and enumerates the included fields (location path, serial, model, purchase, warranty, custom fields, tags, attachments). This helps the agent understand matching behavior and return contents.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by identification details and return fields. Every word earns its place; no redundancy or fluff.

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 simple one-parameter schema, readOnlyHint annotation, and no output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It covers identification methods, matching behavior, and return contents, leaving no major gaps for the agent to invoke correctly.

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 provides only a parameter name 'identifier' with zero description coverage. The description compensates fully by explaining that it can be an assetId (with example), alias custom field, or name with fuzzy fallback. This is essential semantic value 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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Get full detail for one item' with specific identifier methods (assetId, alias, name). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_items by focusing on a single item's full detail, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 when to use this tool: when full detail for one item is needed, identified by assetId, alias, or name. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context of a single-item getter is clear. Sibling tools like search_items are implicitly alternatives for discovery, though not named.

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