Get Custom Item By ID

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states that it retrieves details; it does not mention return format, error handling, permission requirements, or any side effects. For a read operation, this is insufficient beyond the most basic action.

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 short sentence that conveys the essential purpose without redundancy. It earns its place and is immediately readable.

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?

The tool is a simple getter, and the schema thoroughly documents parameters. However, there is no output schema and the description does not explain what the returned custom item contains or how errors are handled. It is minimally adequate but could be improved with a note on response structure or not-found behavior.

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%, with itemId described as 'ID custom item', apiKey and athleteId also documented. The description adds no additional parameter context beyond what the schema already provides, matching the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 'Ambil detail satu custom item berdasarkan ID' clearly states the action (ambil/get), resource (custom item), and scope (satu/one by ID). It distinguishes from the sibling get_custom_items list tool by emphasizing single-item retrieval.

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 'berdasarkan ID' implies the tool should be used when an item ID is known, but it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over get_custom_items or exclude other alternatives. Sibling names provide context but no direct guidance.

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