get_tenantRetrieve all stored fields for a tenant and documents linked to them by tenant ID. Use to fetch tenant profile details and associated documents in Lendlord.
Every stored field for one tenant, plus documents linked to them.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tenantId | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine scope context by noting the response bundles linked documents, which the annotations do not convey; it says nothing about pagination, auth, or volume of linked documents.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence that states resource and output scope with no filler. A fragment rather than a full sentence, but every word carries information.
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?
With no output schema, the description does double duty and partially delivers by sketching the return shape (fields + linked documents). It remains vague about what 'linked documents' contains and what happens when the tenant is absent.
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 0% and the description only implies that the single tenantId selects one tenant. It adds no format, source, or validity detail for the identifier, so it does not compensate for the missing schema documentation.
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?
Names the resource (one tenant) and its output scope — all stored fields plus linked documents — which distinguishes it from list_tenants and get_property. The retrieval verb is implied rather than stated, but the resource and result shape are 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?
There is no statement of when to use this rather than list_tenants (plural) or get_property for related data, and no prerequisites. The only implicit signal is 'one tenant', which implies a single-entity lookup.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.