get_note

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. The word 'Get' implies a read-only, non-mutating operation, which is the key trait here, but the description says nothing about permissions, behavior when the UUID is not found, or what the response contains.

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 with the verb, resource, and lookup key in immediate succession. Every word earns its place with zero filler.

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 single-item getter with no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimally adequate but omits what the caller receives and how lookup failures behave. It gives just enough to invoke the tool, not enough to fully anticipate its behavior.

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?

With one parameter and 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents 'id' as 'Note UUID'. The description's 'by its UUID' confirms the parameter's role but adds no syntax, format, or sourcing detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Productboard note') with the identifying mechanism ('by its UUID'). However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling get_note_v1, which an agent could easily confuse with this tool, nor does it clarify its relationship to list_notes.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives such as list_notes, list_all_notes, or get_note_v1. The phrase 'a single note by its UUID' implies retrieval-by-id rather than listing, but the agent must infer this with no stated exclusions.

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