get_goal_detail

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the output (KPI, sub-goals, etc.) but does not disclose any behavioral traits like required permissions, performance implications, or side effects. Given the tool reads data, the lack of destructive hint is not critical, but more context would be beneficial.

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 very concise, only one sentence, and front-loads the purpose. It could potentially include more detail without being verbose, but it currently has no 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?

Given the tool has a single parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally acceptable but lacks explanation of the return format or how it ties into the goal management workflow. It is complete enough for a simple read operation but not fully comprehensive.

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 covers the only parameter (goal_id) with 100% coverage, so the description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves details of a goal, including KPIs, sub-goals, deliverables, and comment count. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like get_goals, which may also return goal information, so not a 5.

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 use for retrieving comprehensive goal details, but it does not explicitly state when to use this over get_goals or get_kpi_progress, nor does it mention prerequisites or alternatives.

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