arc_get_tab

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

The annotations already declare the tool as readOnly, destructive=false, idempotent=true. The description adds that the record is 'full normalized,' indicating comprehensive data. It does not contradict annotations and adds context beyond the structured fields.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose. Every word is meaningful and there is no redundancy or filler.

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's low complexity (2 params, output schema present), the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not explain what 'full normalized' entails or clarify when to use 'include_recovery'. The output schema exists, which helps, but the description could be more helpful.

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% and the description only indirectly covers the 'tab_id' parameter by mentioning 'by explicit tab id'. The 'include_recovery' parameter (default false) is not explained at all. The description does not sufficiently compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 action ('Get') and the resource ('full normalized Arc tab record') with a specific retrieval method ('by explicit tab id'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like arc_query_tabs (searching) and arc_select_tab (selecting) by focusing on a single tab via ID.

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 when a specific tab ID is known, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., arc_query_tabs for filtering or arc_get_overview for summary). No guidance on prerequisites or exclusions is provided.

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