Get Stream

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden, and it does declare the safety profile ('read-only and does not change NPM'). It still omits error behavior for a nonexistent/invalid ID, which matters for a fetch-by-ID tool with no annotation coverage.

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?

Three tight sentences, purpose front-loaded before the sibling routing. The final return-field sentence partially duplicates the existing output schema, so it does not fully earn 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?

An output schema exists, so return values are covered structurally; combined with purpose, sibling routing, and the read-only declaration, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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 single parameter is fully documented in the schema (100% coverage) including its origin ('from the matching list tool'), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds only 'by ID', which is baseline-level value.

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?

Specific verb (Fetch) plus resource (one TCP/UDP stream by ID) with the returned content named (forwarding ports, protocol settings). It is immediately distinguishable from list_streams and from the update/delete stream siblings.

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?

Explicitly scopes itself to a single stream and names the alternative: 'use list_streams to find IDs or inspect all streams.' The condition selecting the sibling is stated, not implied.

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