get_item

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), the description adds valuable context: the intended use for fetching 'version' before mutations, and the structure of the 'creators' field. This helps the agent understand the return format and practical usage. It does not contradict 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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, then usage guidance, then an important return-format detail. It references search_items' docstring instead of elaborating, keeping it concise and well-structured with zero wasted words.

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-parameter read tool with good annotations, the description covers the core purpose, usage context, and a key return field (creators). It lacks details about full return structure or error handling, but points to search_items' docstring for more, which is acceptable given the low complexity.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only says 'by key' without explaining what a 'key' is, its format, or how it relates to the item. This adds minimal meaning beyond the parameter name, leaving the agent to infer the key's semantics.

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's action ('Fetch one item by key') with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_items by emphasizing single-item retrieval, and the read-only nature is explicitly stated.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use this to get an item's current version right before a mutating call, if you don't already have a fresh one from search_items.' This names an alternative (search_items) and gives a concrete use case, effectively telling the agent when not to use it.

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