get_single_recurring_item

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

With readOnlyHint=true, the safety profile is already covered by annotations. The description adds meaningful behavior by explaining that an optional date range populates the 'matches' object, which is not derivable from the annotations alone. There is no contradiction and no hidden side-effect implication.

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 two short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, then adds only the essential optional-date-range behavior, making every word useful.

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 read-only getter with a fully documented parameter schema and a readOnlyHint annotation, the definition is complete enough to invoke correctly. It does not describe the full return shape or name alternative tools, but those gaps are minor here because the operation and its main behavior are clearly stated.

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 description coverage is 100%, and all parameters already have clear descriptions including formats and the dependency between start_date and end_date. The tool description adds no per-parameter meaning, so the baseline of 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 ('Retrieve'), a clear resource ('single recurring item'), and a lookup key ('by ID'). The word 'single' also distinguishes it from the sibling get_recurring_items operation without needing to inspect schema.

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 a targeted get-by-ID use case and the schema adds a useful prerequisite ('Call get_recurring_items first to discover ids'). However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives or when not to use it, so the routing is mostly implied.

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