get_run

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. 'Get' conveys read-only retrieval, but the description does not disclose response shape, not-found behavior, authentication needs, or any other caveats. It is safe but thin.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. Every word contributes to identifying the operation and the key lookup criterion.

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 low complexity—one required numeric parameter and no enums or nested objects—the description is largely sufficient. There is no output schema, so a note about the return value would improve completeness, but the semantics of 'get a test run by ID' already imply the retrieved run object.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage for the single parameter with 'Test run ID'. The description's 'by ID' adds no meaningful semantic information beyond what the schema states, 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and names the exact resource ('test run') with a lookup qualifier ('by ID'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_runs (plural) and get_test (a different entity).

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 phrase 'by ID' establishes the clear use case: retrieve a single run when you have its run_id. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but for a one-parameter lookup the context is clear enough.

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