get_ticket

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only states 'returns details' without specifying whether this is a read-only operation, what happens if the ID is invalid, or any side effects. This is insufficient for full 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 a single sentence that conveys the essential information without any extraneous words. It is front-loaded with the main action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally viable but lacks details about return format, error cases, or any additional context. For a more complete description, it could mention response structure or typical usage notes.

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 input schema already describes the 'id' parameter as 'The numeric ID of the support ticket to retrieve,' achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 details of a specific support ticket by its ID. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'list_tickets' (which returns many) and 'create_ticket' (which creates a new one), leaving no ambiguity about the function.

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 you need details of a single ticket via its ID) and implicitly differentiates from 'list_tickets' and 'create_ticket'. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention any prerequisites, but the context makes the usage clear.

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