Retrieve a specific destination by its UUID to access its configuration details. Use this tool to fetch a single destination record when you need its current settings.
Get a single destination by UUID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| destination_uuid | Yes | Destination UUID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds no extra behavioral context (e.g., return format, errors), but for a simple getter this is acceptable given the annotations.
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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the key information. Every word earns its place with zero unnecessary detail.
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 simplicity of the tool (single parameter, no output schema), the description is sufficient. It clearly states what is returned (a single destination by UUID), though it doesn't detail the return structure, which is not critical for a simple getter.
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 input schema already provides a complete description of the only parameter (destination_uuid: 'Destination UUID'), covering 100% of the schema. The tool description adds no additional semantic value 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?
The description clearly uses the verb 'Get' with the resource 'destination' and specifies the unique identifier (UUID), making its purpose obvious and distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_destinations and create_destination.
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 using this tool when you need a single destination identified by UUID. While it doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when-not-to-use, the sibling context (list/create) makes the usage context clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.