Get Action

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavior. It lists returned fields and implies a read-only fetch, but does not disclose error behavior (e.g., not found), authentication needs, or any side effects. This is acceptable for a simple getter but lacks detail beyond the field list.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and no wasted words. The field list provides necessary detail without bloating the description.

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?

For a simple single-entity retrieval, the description is nearly complete. It lists the returned fields, which compensates for the missing output schema. It does not cover error cases, but for this scope the description is sufficient.

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 documents actionId as 'Action Id' with 100% coverage. The description adds minimal new information ('by its Id' aligns with the schema). Given the high schema coverage, the baseline score 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 clearly states the tool retrieves a single Action by its Id, specifying the exact fields returned. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_actions (which lists actions) and find_action_by_order (which finds by order).

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 usage is implied: use this when you have an actionId and need full details for one action. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives such as list_actions or find_action_by_order.

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