autotask_get_opportunity

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It correctly implies a read operation (since it's 'get'), but fails to disclose any side effects, error conditions, or required permissions. However, for a simple retrieval tool, a score of 3 is fair.

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, no wasted words. Information is front-loaded and precise.

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 tool's simplicity (single parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally complete. However, it lacks any details about return format or possible error scenarios.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage with a clear description for opportunityId. The description adds no further meaning beyond 'Get a specific opportunity by ID', which is adequate but not helpful beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states the action (get), resource (opportunity), and retrieval method (by ID). While specific, it does not differentiate from siblings like autotask_get_quote, but the sibling set includes many CRUD tools which are naturally distinct by entity type.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., autotask_search_opportunities). The description provides no context about prerequisites or when it's appropriate to use.

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