Get execution

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions that includeData returns potentially large per-node data, which is helpful, but does not address permissions, rate limits, or any side effects. Since it's a read operation, destructive behavior is not needed, but more context would improve transparency.

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 two sentences long with no extraneous information. It front-loads the core purpose and follows with a useful caution about the optional parameter. Every sentence earns its place.

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 simplicity (2 parameter, no output schema), the description is reasonably complete. It covers the main purpose and the key parameter nuance. The only minor gap is not mentioning that the response includes execution details beyond node data, but it is sufficient for a tool of this complexity.

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 has 100% coverage, so it already documents both parameters. The description adds value by explaining the implication of includeData (large response, error diagnosis), which goes beyond the schema's simple description. This helps the agent decide when to set it to true.

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 'Get the details of an execution,' specifying the verb and resource. It also mentions the optional includeData flag, but does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'list_executions' tool, though the distinction (single vs. list) is implied.

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 provides guidance on using includeData ('for diagnosing errors'), but does not explain when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_executions or when not to use it. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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