incident_detections__get_detection_v1

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — no note on what a 404 means, whether the detection body is large, or how it relates to the v2 endpoint.

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?

It is short, but the entire content is duplicated verbatim inside parentheses, which is pure waste, and there is no front-loaded statement of purpose.

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?

With no output schema, the description should say what a retrieval returns or at least distinguish v1 from v2. Neither is present, so an agent must call it blind or guess between the two versions.

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%, so detectionUuid (format uuid) and the optional local 'fields' projection are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no meaning beyond it, so the baseline 3 applies under the high-coverage rule.

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 text is a bare HTTP path restated twice: "GET /v1/detections/{detectionUuid} - (GET /v1/detections/{detectionUuid})". It conveys only the verb and path already encoded in the tool name and title, with no statement of what a 'detection' is or what is returned.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance at all, and critically no differentiation from incident_detections__get_detection_v2 or incident_detections__list_detections_v1, which are direct siblings an agent must choose between.

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