get_bounty

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states 'Get detailed information', which is the purpose rather than behavioral disclosures such as whether auth is required, error handling for invalid IDs, or the exact response structure. This is minimal 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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant phrasing. Every word contributes to clarity, making it appropriately concise.

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 simple get-by-ID tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently conveys the core functionality and expected input. It doesn't enumerate what 'detailed information' includes, but this is a minor gap given the simplicity of the operation and clear sibling differentiation.

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 100%: the 'id' parameter is documented with type and example. The description mentions 'by its ID' but adds no new semantic meaning beyond the schema, so it remains at the baseline for high schema coverage.

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?

Description uses a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'bounty' with a clear qualifier 'by its ID', distinguishing it from siblings like list_bounties. It clearly states the action and scope.

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 phrase 'specific bounty by its ID' clearly implies this should be used when you have a bounty ID and need details, in contrast to list_bounties. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or provide exclusion criteria, so it stops short of a 5.

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