redmine_get_issue

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

No annotations provided. The description indicates a read operation with 'Get full details', implying no side effects. However, it does not explicitly state idempotency or safety, relying on the verb 'Get' to suggest read-only behavior.

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, efficiently conveying purpose and scope. The prefix '[Stable]' is slightly extraneous but does not detract significantly. Front-loaded with key 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?

Given no output schema, the description provides a high-level summary of returned data (description, status, dates, optional journals/attachments). It covers the main purpose and key parameters, but could mention additional common fields like priority or assignee for full completeness.

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 coverage is 0% (no descriptions in schema). The description adds meaning by explaining the 'id' parameter as a numeric ID and 'include' as optional extras like journals and attachments. However, it fails to detail the comma-separated format or list possible include values, leaving some interpretation to the agent.

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 full details of a single Redmine issue by numeric ID, including specific fields and optional extras like journals and attachments. It distinguishes from siblings like redmine_list_issues which list multiple issues.

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 usage for fetching a single issue's details but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like redmine_list_issues or when not to use it. No guidance on prerequisites or context.

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