Icu Get Custom Item

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, so safety is covered; the description adds real context by noting that `content` here is the same structure as in the list result, which tells the agent what to expect from the focused fetch. It does not cover what happens for an unknown or out-of-scope item_id, and does not mention the athlete_id scoping for coaches, leaving a small gap.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the operation and followed by the sequencing constraint, with zero filler. Every clause carries information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail is not needed, and the sequencing plus the content-field equivalence give the agent enough to call it correctly. Only the edge behavior (missing ID, athlete scoping) is unaddressed, which is minor for a read-only lookup.

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 only two simple parameters, so the schema already carries the parameter meaning; the description adds nothing about item_id format or the athlete_id coach-scoping parameter. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Fetch the full configuration of ONE custom addition by ID') and the emphasis on 'ONE' plus 'by ID' distinguishes it cleanly from the sibling icu_get_custom_items list tool. An agent can pick between them without opening either schema.

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?

'Use AFTER icu_get_custom_items has returned an ID' names the sibling and the exact precondition, and adds the user intent ('wants to inspect a specific chart/field/zone/panel') that selects this tool over the list. This mirrors the strongest calibration example for routing guidance.

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