Goals Get Goal

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., what fields are returned, authentication needs, or side effects), so it provides minimal value beyond the annotations.

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?

While very short (two words), the description is under-specified and omits essential information. True conciseness would include critical details about usage and parameters.

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?

The description is entirely insufficient for a tool with 4 parameters and no output schema. It does not describe return values, data shape, or any contextual information needed for correct invocation.

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 50%: parameters goal_id and session_path lack descriptions. The description does not explain or add meaning to any parameters. It fails to compensate for the missing schema descriptions, leaving agents uncertain about how to use goal_id and session_path.

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 'Get goal' is a tautology that restates the tool name and title. It does not specify what kind of goal, what information is returned, or differentiate it from sibling tools like goals_list_goals or goals_get_goal_budget_amounts.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as goals_list_goals for listing multiple goals or goals_get_goal_budget_amounts for budget-specific data. The description lacks any context about appropriate use cases.

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