Get contest details

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

The annotations already indicate a safe read-only operation and openWorld, and the description does not contradict them. The description adds only retrieval scope, with no detail about not-found behavior or access prerequisites, but that is less critical given readOnlyHint.

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 five-word sentence with no filler. Every word earns its place, and the key selecting mechanism (id) is front-loaded.

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 one-parameter read-only fetch this is minimally viable, but there is no output schema and the description does not describe what a returned contest includes or how this relates to list_contests. The title helps, but the description carries too little context.

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%, but the single required contest_id parameter is self-descriptive and the description's 'by id' maps to it. It does not explain where to obtain contest_id or what the integer represents beyond the schema bounds.

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 phrase 'One contest by id' clearly indicates a single-contest fetch keyed by identifier, and the title 'Get contest detailes' supplies the verb. It differentiates from list_contests by scope but does not explicitly name any sibling.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this tool versus list_contests, contest_action, or get_project. An agent must infer from 'by id' that it is for a known ID, but the description gives no context or exclusions.

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