jazz_get_row

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description's 'Fetch' aligns with that. The description adds the scope (by table name and row id) but does not disclose behaviors like what happens if the row is not found or whether the response is wrapped.

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 short sentence, front-loaded with the verb 'Fetch', and contains no unnecessary words. It is highly concise and directly to the point.

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 2-parameter read tool with annotations indicating read-only behavior, the description covers the core purpose and parameter identity well. There is no output schema to explain, and the description is adequately complete for its simplicity. It lacks mention of error cases or return format, which are not strictly necessary here.

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 0% description coverage for parameters. The description compensates by mapping 'table name' to the 'table' parameter and 'row id' to the 'id' parameter, but it adds no further semantics beyond their names and purpose.

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 uses a specific verb 'Fetch' and a clear resource 'one Jazz row', explicitly identifying the operation and the key identifiers (table name and row id). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like jazz_insert, jazz_delete, and the broader jazz_query.

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 is used when you have a table name and row id and want that single row. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this instead of jazz_query or other siblings, nor any exclusion criteria.

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