cor_get_client

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the basic operation and does not disclose behavior such as error handling on missing ID, permission requirements, or side effects.

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 very brief (two sentences) and front-loaded. However, it is under-specified for a tool with no annotations; every sentence is necessary but more detail would be beneficial without being verbose.

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 output schema exists, the description need not explain return values. However, it does not mention the scope of data returned (full client object) or error conditions. It is minimally complete for a simple get-by-ID tool.

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 description adds 'client_id: The client ID', clarifying the parameter's role beyond the schema's title 'Client Id'. With 0% schema coverage, this provides some context, but lacks format or constraints.

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 'Get a single client by ID', specifying the verb (Get), resource (client), and scope (by ID). This distinguishes it from siblings like cor_list_clients (list) and cor_create_client (create).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that for listing all clients one should use cor_list_clients, nor does it specify any preconditions or limitations.

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