sdd_get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safe read-only behavior is covered. The description adds that the tool 'returns full contract data', which is useful, but it does not disclose error behavior, not-found handling, or any authentication expectations. This is acceptable but not rich.

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 concise and front-loaded. Each sentence adds value: the first defines the core action, and the second clarifies the expected return content. There is no unnecessary jargon or duplication.

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 low-complexity read tool with one parameter and read-only/idempotent annotations, the description is largely complete. It names the resource, the lookup method, and what is returned. It could be slightly more complete by explicitly describing not-found behavior or the meaning of SDD contract, but these are not critical for selecting or invoking the tool.

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 already documents the sole parameter fully: 'Contract ID to retrieve'. With 100% schema description coverage, the description adds little new parameter meaning beyond restating that lookup is by ID. It meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 operation: 'Get a single SDD contract by ID', with a specific verb, resource, and lookup key. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like sdd_list, sdd_save, and sdd_history by emphasizing single-contract retrieval.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and no exclusions or conditions are mentioned. The phrase 'by ID' only implies the usage case; it does not tell the agent when to choose this over sdd_list or sdd_history.

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