get_release

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits itself. It only states what data is returned and does not mention auth requirements, rate limits, pagination, or any side effects. The verb 'Get' suggests a read operation, but the safety profile is not explicitly disclosed.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then lists useful detail categories without any filler. Every word contributes to the agent's understanding.

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 lookup with no output schema, the description gives a reasonable picture of what to expect: full release details with key fields named. It does not cover error cases or return structure, but the tool's simplicity keeps this from being a major gap.

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 schema has one integer id parameter with 0% description coverage. The description compensates by clarifying that the release is a Discogs release, so the id represents a release ID. For a single simple parameter, this provides enough semantic context beyond the raw schema.

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 starts with a specific verb and resource: 'Get full details for a Discogs release,' and lists concrete content areas (tracklist, formats, labels, identifiers). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_master or get_artist, which target different Discogs entities.

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 the tool should be used when full details of a specific release are needed, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives such as get_master or get_master_versions. There are no exclusions or alternative guidance provided.

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