get_release

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explicitly lists the data returned (commit info, last commit, first/last event, deploy count, new issues, associated projects), giving an agent concrete expectations. It does not mention read-only status or error conditions, but for a get operation, this disclosure is reasonably transparent.

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 front-loads the action and resource, then compactly lists the returned details. There is no redundancy or filler, making it highly scannable.

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 tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description adequately explains what the tool returns by listing the details. It lacks explicit response structure, but this is not critical for a get-by-key tool, and the description covers the essential information for an agent to decide and invoke 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for both parameters (org, version), including guidance to get versions from list_releases. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 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 uses the specific verb 'Get' with a clear target 'specific release by version' and enumerates the included details (commit info, deploy count, etc.). This makes it unambiguous and distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_releases, which lists releases rather than fetching details for one.

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 the use case: retrieving details for a single known release version. The version parameter hint ('Get these from list_releases') suggests a workflow but is in the schema, not the tool description. The description itself gives clear context for when to use this tool, without exclusions or alternatives.

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