build_uploads__get

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

The description's 'Read' aligns with the readOnlyHint annotation but adds no extra behavioral context beyond the ID-based single-fetch nature. No mention of auth, rate limits, or relationship fetching trade-offs, though the schema provides some details. Since annotations already establish safety, a 3 is appropriate.

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 plus endpoint path, with no redundant information. It is front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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 operation with rich schema descriptions and safety annotations, the description is adequate but minimal. It doesn't explicitly mention return format or that include/fields control response size, but the schema covers these aspects. No output schema exists, so return value details are not required.

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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters, including clear guidance on id sourcing, include relationships, and fields_buildUploads size implications. The description text adds no parameter-specific meaning, so baseline 3 applies.

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 reads a single build upload by ID, with the specific HTTP endpoint. It distinguishes from sibling tools like build_uploads__delete, build_uploads__create, and list variants.

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 usage when one has a build upload ID and needs to fetch that specific resource. It provides clear context but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion cases beyond the inherent 'one' vs 'many' distinction.

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